Exhibitors Herald (1927)

32 BETTER THEATRES SECTION OF December 24, 1927 OSS'* Something New in Kliegl Spotlights ■*530 ! i CENTRALIZED control of: arc, color frames, iris shutter, curtain shutter, etc., all from rear of the spotlight. Convenient location of control handles provides utmost flexibility and ease of operation. Built substantially; speedy and practical in operation; truly remarkable improvements — long desired. Referring to the illustration which is a rear view of the spotlight: 1. CURTAIN SHUTTER CONTROL: Opens and closes the curtain shutter in front of the lens, from black-out or a mere slit to full opening. 2. IRIS SHUTTER CONTROL: A partial turn of the handle opens the iris shutter from a pin-point to full opening, or vice versa. 3. COLOR FRAME CONTROL: Separate lever for each color frame, and each lever keyed to correspond with the color frame it controls. A quarter turn of the lever throws the desired color in or out of position in front of the lens; and each color is visible to the operator as the color frame is moved into position. 4. FOCUSING CONTROL: Positions arc with respect to the lens; moves horizon tally; thumb nut locks it in place. 5. ARC CONTROL: Varies the distance between the carbons; permits accurate and smooth adjustments of the arc. 6. HANDLE: For control of direction of the light beam — hood is perfectly balanced, swings easily and “follows” readily. 7. WING LOCK: Holds hood securely at desired angle. Long leverage permits easy and speedy adjustments. Write for Descriptive Folder Universal Electric Stage Lighting Co.,inc l OES-r 321 West 50th Street NEW YORK. N.’lfl, § *530 REISINGS Artificial Plants, Trees, Flowers and Vines are true to Nature. Better Theatres use them. John Eberson’s Atmospheric Theatres are decorated with them. Write us for quotations on your needs G. REISING & CO. 227 West Austin Ave., Chicago, 111. Specialists on Theatre Decorations Do You Know Your Law? ( Continued from page 27) follows: The arch of her foot had fallen; her ankle was stiffened and somewhat enlarged; there was a tendency to rheumatism in the foot and knee; there was some shortening of the tendons of the ankle, interfering with walking and tending to throw the foot to one side; she was compelled to wear bandages to keep the foot in place, and a support to prevent the arch from falling; she was unable to walk for a distance without great pain and swelling of the ankle, and could not engage in sports and pastimes, such as swimming, dancing, tennis, and hiking, as had been her wont before the injury. Physicians declared that they could not say whether or not the injury would be permanent but that with constant treatment the injury might be completely worked out. During the trial the injured girl introduced evidence to prove that the carpet was loose and bulged over the steps two weeks before the accident happened. The theatre proprietor contended that he was not liable since he had not been informed of the dangerous condition of the carpet by the employes or patrons of the theatre and further had he been notified of the defect he would have repaired it. However, in holding the theatre proprietor liable for damages, in the above mentioned amount, the higher court explained the law on the subject, as follows: “The defendant (theatre operator) seems to labor under the impression that the plaintiff (injured patron) case depends on proof that defendant had notice of the defect in the carpet. . . . The defendant is not an insurer of the safety of its patrons, but the law does impose on it the duty to use ordinary care to make its theatre reasonably safe. The evidence shows that the carpet was loose and extended over the edge of a step, on a stairway at a place under the defendant’s control, and that this defect caused the accident. This occurrence was one that would not take place in the ordinary management of a theatre, if reasonable care were used. We are of opinion that the circumstances immediately attending plaintiff’s injury, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, afford sufficient evidence that the injury was occasioned by want of ordinary care to keep the stairway reasonably safe. It was not necessary for the plaintiff to show that defendant knew of the defect.” Therefore, it is quite apparent that theatre owners and managers should instruct employes the importance of promptly reporting defects in the theatre premises, so that the proper repairs may be made without undue delay. Moreover, it is important to know that the law is established that a theatre owner who has exercised ordinary care in maintaining the premises in safe condition is not liable in damages for injuries sustained by patrons. * * * Employe Serving Employer Is in Employment Quite often, in litigations involving the liability of a theatre owner for damages as a result of injuries sustained by employes, the case turns on the question: Was the employe acting within the scope of his employment when the