Cinema News and Property Gazette (1912)

14 THE CINEMA. July, 1912. FIVE YEARS AGO! A RECORD OF REMARKABLE PROGRESS. By SAMUEL HARRIS. [The writer of the following article occupies an unique position in the Cinematograph World, for his firm ivas instrumental in starling the pioneer Cinema Theatre Proprietors in business. He has seen a vast industry grow up, and as he negotiates the sale of most of the leading properties which come into the market, he has long been recognised as the expert to whom one naturally turns for advice and guidance when about to enter the ranks of exhibitors. The article will therefore be read Kith special interest.] IYE years ago ' It seems more like fifteen ; and yet some things come back to me so clearly that it seems as though it were only a few weeks ago that Mr. Horace Sedger and Mr. Laurillard came to me and asked if I could let them Marble Arch for a cinematograph theatre. When I approached my clients, what did they say ? West End Pioneers. " No penny gaffs for us ! " What a deal of talking I had to do to make them think otherwise. At last, however, their consent was obtained. But that was merely a preliminary canter. We had fourteen other consents to obtain, all of them sub lessees', and then, last but not least, Lord Portman's consent through his steward, Mr. Hunt. A separate licence was required from each ; they all had different firms of solicitors, and under Lord Portman's head licence no Sunday opening was allowed. The law costs alone for these consents amounted to over £500. No L.C.C. Plans then. Every other day for about a month Mr. Sedger or Mr. Laurillard was consulting me as to these consents. Some of the intermediate lessees had gone, heaven alone knew where, and they or their trustees or assigns had to be traced and found. At last, step by step, the various licences were obtained, even that of Lord Portman. I well remember how they opened and remained open for weeks before they obtained the licence or even asked for it, and as for plans being passed by the L.C.C., we didn't think of little things like that in those days ! This, then, was the start of The Electric Palaces, Limited, which now has its cinematograph theatres running, all over London. The success, of course, with Mr. Sedger "and Mr. Laurillard at the head of affairs with their theatrical experience was from the first assured. I think, however, that Marble Arch was the first West End cinematograph theatre to be run on proper lines, and really gave a start to the West End cinematograph theatre business. I believe this was due to the fact that it was run in such good style and thereby commenced to educate the public to the idea. And they wanted a bit of educating to even consent to put a foot inside "one of those glorified magic lantern shows," as they called them in those days. What a Difference ! And then, again, Edgware Road— Pyke's first theatre. What a difficulty I had in getting him that ! A funny thing— Mr. Grant was negotiating with me about that p-operty, but he turned it down because he had such a lot of trouble about the rebuilding. Then Mr. Pyke came along. "Have you got any place to let •where they will allow a cinematograph show to be carried on?" That was the question in those days. ••Where the landlords will MR. SAMUEL HARRIS allow." What a difference now ! Every owner of property who has any premises he can't let, no matter whether tbey are down a side street, back street, or even worse than that, writes me that it is " the very spot for a cinematograph theatre.'' Auctioneers do the same regarding all sorts and kinds of premises or building land, wherever it may be or whatever size — even some.imes 18 feet frontage by 64 feet deep. And it is always on the printed particulars — " especially suitable for a cinematograph theatre." Now^and Then. And then when I have been asked to inspect and teport on the property, I really feel that it is hard lines for a client to have t > pay a fee to receive a report on such a Lroperty ; but I console myself that for a small fee of a few guineas I have saved my client thousands. How few film manufacturers there were in those days ! And as for renters, were there any ? I don't think so ; a couple of offices were all that were necessary in tbose days. Now look at the palatial offices of Gaum,nt, the Urban Trading Company, Pathes, Vitagraph, Essanay, Williamson, etc. Five years ago there were, as far as I can remember, the theatres in the Strand, opposite Charing Cross Hospital, the Hammersmith one, Grant's, the Parkhurst, and three or four others — I think you could count them all on your fingers — and now in five years something like 600 to 800 London and seve:al thousand provincial theatres, and about ten new ones opening every week. In these days Gaumont employed only a few men in their film factory in Paris. To-day there are over 1,400. Five years ago there were about 100 men employed in the cir.ematograph theatre business in the whole of London. Now there are, at a rough estimate, nearly 100,000. I wonder if it is possible to point to any other industry which has made such rapid strides in five years. Is it possible to point to any other industry which has been of such great benefit to charity ? Is there any other industry which gives, ^year in and year out, over £10, 000 to various charities ? New theatres certainly ought to be welcomed and received with open arms. They give to charity and benefit the million. Do mu ic halls which open on Sundays do the same, or do they only benefit one fraternity ? A Word in Season. In five years they have become a power in the land, and I hope as each year rolls by, they will become a greater one But we must look to it that our local borough councillors, our county councillors and our Members of Parliament all know that we are to be reckoned with ; that we are growing ; and that in another five years — well, who can prophesy? We shall see. There is one thing, however, to remember, and that is, not to split up into various factions and fight one with another. A long pull, a strong pull, and we shall come into our own, and not remain in statu quo, to be sat upon. Five years behind us. We must not forget the five in front of us.