Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (Sep 1935 - Aug 1936)

INDEPENDENT EXHIBITORS FILM BULLETIN 3 EVENTS on the MARCH! "Reporting the Industry's News from An Editorial Viewpoint" Defense Has Hard Task To Swing St. Louis Case! Court Refuses To Dismiss St. Louis Indictments Against 5 Film Executives Special to FILM BULLETIN Motions Overruled . . . ST. LOUIS. — Federal Judge George H. Moore overruled on Monday the motions of counsel for Harry M. Warner, Herman Starr, Ned E. Depinet, George J. Schaefer and Gradwell Sears to dismiss the anti-trust indictments under which they are facing criminal charges here in U. S. District Court. The defense had spent an energetic three days the latter part of last week in an effort to convince the Court that the Government had not made out its conspiracy case against the defendants and that, therefore. Judge Moore should instruct the jury to return a verdict of "not guilty". Charge Lack of Proof . . . The array of high-powered defense lawyers argued that the testimony of Government witnesses had been merelv a recitation of events which were not linked up to prove a conspiracy. Frederick H. Wood, one of the Warner attorneys asked the Court, "Where in this record is the necessary link to establish a conspiracy on the part of the defendants?" Pointing out each of the three defendants connected with Warner Bros., Wood argued that they had not been tied in with any conspiracy. Warner, Sears and Starr, he claimed had merely been protecting their business interests in a legitimate manner. Of Starr, who was charged by Harry C. Arthur with making the remark that Fanchon 8C Marco were "the lambs who have to be slaughtered", Wood said, "What about him? They didn't like his manner and he made some threats. All he did was put his signature on certain leases. That's all, and that's not enough to tie him in with a so-called conspiracy." Gov't Recalls Witnesses . . . The Government scored one of the most telling points in the entire proceedings last Wednesday, the day it rested its case, by winning the approval of the Court to recall two of its most important witnesses, Harry C. Arthur, head of F & M, and Thomas N. Dysart, chairman of the bondholders' committee of the three theatres involved in the action. The purpose of this move was to link the testimony of these two witnesses with all the defendants, instead of directing it exclusively at Warner. This is expected to prove a strong weapon against the defense and their counsel indicated their fear of its effect by battling furiously to prevent it. Basis for Appeal . . . It is believed by observers here that the Court's grant of this point to Russell Hardy, chief of Government counsel, will be the focal point of an attack on an adverse decision, if such should be the outcome of the case. This was evidenced by the fact that attorneys for the three defendants refused to cross examine Arthur and Dysart when the Government turned them over. Ex-senator James A. Reed angrily referred to the move as "a trick", and the Court sustained Mr. Hardy's objection to the remark. Wood had this to say: "Arthur was the Government's opening gun and now they are making him the parting salute." And, again it should be pointed out that unless the defendants can successfully and conclusively contradict Arthur's testimony, the defense faces the probability of conviction. They have opened their defense and have a difficult job on their hands. Penna. Communities Decide Sunday Movie Issue At Polls Tues. November 5th . . . Next Tuesday, November 5th, is the day on which 272 Pennsylvania communities will decide if they wish to preserve the ancient state "blue laws," or liberalize them by voting to permit the opening of movie houses on the Sabbath after 2 P. M. On that day hundreds of thousands of voters will go to the polls to indicate their pleasure on the Schwartz-Mclchiorre-Barbcr bill referendum, which provides for a vote by local option. This week, both pros and cons are feverishly active in preparing for the decision. Heavy barrages of propaganda are being let loose by both sides. The pros, principally, are affiliated chain theatres, business and real estate interests. The cons, principally, are composed of professional reform groups and certain church organizations. Pros . . . Chief among the arguments presented by the pros in favor of the bill is the one that Sunday movies under this measure will in no wise affect the church, inasmuch as the late hour of opening permits fulfillment of one's religious duties. To this they add the following points: Increased employment; halting the flow of capital to other communities where the law allows amusements; a more liberal, but not an "open" Sunday; increase in business for local merchants and real estate values. Cons . . . Those opposing the bill maintain that Sunday movies is sponsored solely by the producerowned chain theatres to increase their revenue; that it will seriously affect the church and the morality of the people; that this measure is the opening wedge for a complete overthrow of the "blue laws" and a wide-open Sabbath in the state. One of the most telling blows yet struck by (Continued on Page 4) Cardinal Dougherty Opposes Sunday Film Shows In Phila. Cardinal Dougherty, who ordered the Catholic boycott of all film theatres in Philadelphia more than a year ago, has announced his opposition to Sunday movies as being "injurious to the cause of religion and morality," in a letter to Rev. Dr. William B. Forney, secretary of the Lord's Day Alliance, disclosed on Monday. The letter, written by Msgr. H. L. Lamb. Chancellor of the Philadelphia Archdiocese, in reply to an inquiry by Rev. Forney on the Cardinal's stand, states, "Cardinal Dougherty is opposed to the exhibition of commercial motion pictures in public theatres on Sunday and is of the opinion that if the proposed measure (for Sunday movies) be passed bj Philadelphia the result will be injurious to the cause of religion and morality. "His Eminence has requested me to inform you that his attitude on the motion picture problem is well known to all and that he has seen no reason to change it within the last few months." Bishop McDevitt, of Harrisburg, and Bishop Boyle, of Pittsburgh, also issued similar opinions. Dr. Forney reported. Stick Around, Uncle Carl! Now that everybody has taken a crack at selling Universal Pictures to everyone except Haile Selassie, we humbly suggest that all the rumor boys hush up while Uncle Carl Laemmle, who is entitled to have something to say, says a few words about it. The grand old veteran frankly says that he will sell if and when he gets a decent offer and one that lets him out cleanly and with something to show for his many years as the one, honest-togoodness independent fighter of them all. He is entitled to such an offer, but we sincerely hope he decides, if and when he gets it, not to accept. For Carl Laemmle has been one of the worthhwile factors in .in industry that harbors too many who regard a fair break for the little fellow as just foolish sentimentalism. Stick around, Uncle Carl!