The Film Renter and Moving Picture News (May-Jun 1923)

June 30, 1923. und hope for some relief next year.” He attributed the failure of the campaign in some degree to the statements made in the Jay Press of the large sums made by American producers, and quoted the story that D. W. Griffith had made £120,000 ou ** Way Down East.’’ That, together with the erection ~f many large kinemas during the past few years, had given the Chancellor of the Exchequer an influted idea of the position of the industry. ** With such information in front of him the Chancellor of the Exchequer concluded that the industry must be something in the nature of a gold mine. It is for the trade to use every means in its power to disillusion him ‘on that point,’’ concluded Councillor Wood. Jeopardising the Kinema Case. Mr. Harry Devey, of the Winson Green P.H., Birmingham, said he was amazed to read in the newspapers that Sir Walter de Frece had refused the offer of a concession. That was the first he had heard of it, and he felt that had the C.E.A. representatives been informed of the offer they might have accepted it. Apparently the music-halls were not prepared to pass on any concessions made by the Government to the public. If that was so he had not the slightest doubt that their attitude jeopardised the case of the kinema trade. Mr. F. H. Leedam, general manager of the Broadway, Birmingham, a stern supporter of total abolition, put his views in a nutshell. What would a manufacturer say if whenever he secured an order for goods which cost him £500 the Government imposed a tax of £50? It would be impossible for him to carry on business. ‘That was the position in which hundreds of suburban exhibitors in the provinces found themselves. What further action the exhibitors would take ho could not see, but the failure to secure any concession would certainly place the proprietors of many of the smaller halls in serisus financial straits. A VETERAN SHOWMAN SPEAKS OUT. Wm. Morton, of Hull, on “ Who Pays.” R. WM. MORTON, the well-known theatre proprietor, and head of the Morton kinema circuit at Hull, has furnished us with his views on the Repeal of the Entertainments Tax Debate, which, unfortunately, ended in things remaining as they are. It was particularly fitting thet Mr. Morton should give his views, as the chief spokesman for the repeal was Commander IXenworthy, who sits for the Central Division of Hull, in which the theatres are mostly situated. ‘* My theatres,’’ said Mr. Morton, ‘‘ ure carrying a burden of 20 per cent. on the turnover. No other industry is so penalised. It is argued that the public pay it, but the public can only pay to the limit of its purse. People who in prosperous times went into the pit now use the gallery in my drama houses, and the same applies to our kinemas.”” f The proposal made by Sir Walter de Freee, that the tax should be altered on prices below 2s., scemed to have been x fair way of meeting the case. Salaries ‘‘ Do not Touch the Case.” Asked whether he considered that the big salaries paid in super productions affected the situation, as stated by Sir JoynsonHicks, Mr. Morton replied that the whole world was a market, and the number of films bought in England was comparatively small considered with the others, so that the proportion of the salary, however big it was, did not touch the case. Regarding over-building, Mr. Mcrton again differed with the Purliamentary spokesman, and instanced the case of Hull, a THE FILM RENTER & MOVING PICTURE NEWS. wa city with some 300,000 population. No kinema had been built there since 1915. He did not agree either with Sir Joynson-Hick’s suggestion that the adoption of Sir Walter de Frece’s suggestion would involve a loss of two millions. ‘‘ I believe,’’ said Mr. Morton, “* that the loss, if any, would be slight, for there would be, as a set-off, increased patronage.”’ Speaking of the innuendo that it was bad times that had brought about the agitation, Mr. Morton said the reason the agitation had only just started was that everybody believed it to be a war measure that would disappear with peace; but us they found it was now about to continue, they began their agitation. SCOTTISH C.E.A ON THE BETRAYAL OF THE TRADE. Westminster and—Margate. T a meeting of the Scottish Branch of the C.E.A., held A in the Central Hulls, Bath Street, Glasgow, last week, reference was made to the Entertainments Tax campaign and the result thereof. Mr. Albin (of Edinburgh) discussing the lobbying in the House of Commons, said tbat the deputationists interviewed a great many Scottish and English Members of Parliament, and it was a pity that such real hard work had not met with a better result. This result, to Alderman Trounson (who had almost lived in the House of Commons during the agitation), must be very disappointing. He regretted to conclude his report in a pessimistic tone, but they all must face the facts of the situation. Their defeat in the Untertainments Tax fight must have been a great blow to the members of the Tax Abolition Committee. They did not receive the support of the great number of members whose votes had been promised them, and this had also to be coupled with the fact that it was a real disaster to the trade. “No Jam To-day.” On Councillor Archibald being called upox to give a statement regarding the lobbying, he stated that as time went on it became fairly obvious to them that the result was going to be that which Was now indicated in the newspapers. As far as the Unionist members were concerned, they almost invariably stated that they sympathised with the demand; they were in full agreement with the case as presented to them; and they would do anything in their power to help—except to vote against the Government! As far as the Liberal and Labour members were concerned, they had stood faithful to their promise, but the Unionists took up the attitude that while they were in favour of the abolition of the tax, they would not vote in that direction in the meantime. In fact, with the Unionists it was a case of jam yesterday, jam to-morrow, but no jam to-day. (Laughter.) The Chairman (Bailie Wright) said it was pleasing to learn from Councillor Archibald that the Liberal and Labour members had stood so loyally by them, and he thought that, while they could only regard the result as being very disappointing, they, at any rate, should record their heartiest thanks to those who had participated in the lobbying for their great efforts on behalf of the entertainment industry in goneral. In reply to this vote of thanks Councillor Archibald said that a very disappointing feature was that, while there was a great many members of the trade present at the Margate meetings, only the Scottish Branch and another branch were represented among the delegations doing lobbying in connection with the Entertainments Tax. He thought that this was a most unfortunate point, and, as far as the Scottish delegation was concerned, not only was it the largest, but a far greater amount (Continued on page 14) fF.