Harrison's Reports (1933)

Entered as second-class matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New York, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879. Harrison’S Yearly Subscription Rates: United States $15.00 U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 Canada 16.50 Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 Great Britain 16.00 Australia, New Zealand, India 17.50 35c a Copy 1440 BROADWAY New York, N. Y. A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. Published Weekly by P. S. HARRISON Editor and Publisher Established July 1, 1919 PEnnsylvania 6-6379 Cable Address : Harreports (Bentley Code) A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XV SATURDAY, APRIL 8, 1933 No. 14 THE OTHER SIDE OF WILLIAM FOX I have just finished reading “Upton Sinclair Presents William Fox,” which deals, as you must know by this time, mainly with the methods Wall Street employed to oust W''illiam Fox from the presidency of the film company he has founded. Throughout the book, Fox presents himself as an angel and paints almost every one of those who had come in contact with him in a business way as a devil. Much of what he says is true — undoubtedly so; but — On page 87, Mr. Sinclair says : “Soon after Hoover’s nomination, but before his election, Greenfield took W’illiam Fox to Washington, and introduced him to President Hoover. William Fox pointed to Greenfield and said : ‘You can blame that little bald-headed Hebrew Jew who made it possible for you to become the President of the United States.’ William Fox reports that ‘Hoover was naturally vitally interested to learn the details of how this came about.’ “William Fox told Hoover of his great admiration for him, and of his desire to see him elected President. In talking to me, Fox explained his reasons in detail, and I listened with no little interest. ... I am glad that he is willing to tell about it frankly. “ ‘I told Greenfield (Fox speaking now) that I was an admirer of Mr. Hoover, and that I was desirous of working for his election, and that my companies could be instrumental in his election ; that the Fo.x Film Corporation made and released in the theatres of America the Fox Movietone Xews, and that I would be happy to devote it in behalf of Herbert Hoover ; that the Fox Movietone News had 10,000,000 theatre patrons, and I considered it a very strong force, and a great ally for any political party to have.’ “And at the talk with Hoover (Sinclair now speaking), William Fox repeated the same thing to him. “ ‘I told him (Fo.x now talking to Sinclair, repeating what he had said to President Hoover) of my admiration for him and of my willingness to work for his election. I told him frankly of my using Movietone News in behalf of his nomination, and that for the election campaign I would be glad to take the most efficient executive I had, and put him in charge of all the picture work that Mr. Hoover would like to have. Mr. Hoover replied that my offer was the most generous one that he had as yet received during his campaign, and that he appreciated it.’ “So William Fox (Sinclair now speaking) spent great sums of money, and gave a great deal of time to Hoover’s cause. He tells me that it was with no definite idea of asking anything in return. But suddenly he found himself in need of a return, and he was invited to luncheon with the President.” Here is the point that I desire to bring out : The 10,000,000 Movietone News patrons Fox talks about were not patrons of Fox theatres. Assuming that Fo.x at that time sold his pictures to an average of six thousand accounts, only about one-twenty-fourth of these patrons were Fox’s own, for on page 328, last paragraph, William Fo.x states that in 1028, the theatres he controlled were only 249. He says : “During my regime. I had increased the number of theatres owned and controlled about as follows : 2 in 1927 ; 249 in 1928 ; 455 in 1929 ; and before I had sold out in 1930 it was 532.” Now, since Fo.x owned but a small number of the screens on which the ten million patrons saw Fo.x Movietone News, it follows that, for him to have pledged to Mr. Hoover, and to have delivered to him for political propaganda, screens he did not own is certainly not an act for any one to brag about in a book. The e.xhibitors bought this News for the interesting events each issue contained, but Fox delivered them with concealed propaganda, in spite of the fact that the contract contains a clause forbidding this abuse : “The Distributor w'arrants that the photoplays herein provided for will not contain any advertising matter for which compensation is received by the Distributor,” says the contract. Isn’t the receiving of political favors compensation? But Mr. Fox is not concerned about such scruples. Perhaps in this matter he felt no differently from what he felt in the matter of the cat and the cheese : On page 25, second paragraph. Fox says in his own words : “Michael (the butter and egg man who conducted a store in the building where Fox lived as a boy) had a very fine cat, the largest I ever saw. I knew Michael’s cat lived on cheese — cheese and milk was all this cat would eat. When the week-end came, I would like to go on picnics, so I would go down to borrow the cat and say we had mice, which we did not. Later I would go downstairs and say that I had offered the cat chicken, and that he wouldn’t eat it, and I wanted some cheese for the cat. Michael would thereupon cut some nice Swiss cheese for the cat, and I would leave with the cheese, but the cat never saw it, because I would take the cheese on my picnic. Then on Monday morning, I would bring Michael’s cat back. Necessity is the mother of invention. I liked Swiss cheese in those days and that was the only way I had of getting it.” Perhaps Fox, in his days of prosperity, had not forgotten the cat-and-cheese method of getting what he wanted. Frequently a bad habit becomes imbedded in one. Here is another case that shows that Fox had an elastic conscience : On page 76, the story of how Fox Film acquired the 400,000 shares of Mrs. Loew with the consent of the bankers is told. When Harry Stuart, of Halsey, Stuart, told him that he had done an unwise thing to pay out fifty million dollars for the purchase of this stock when it was not the majority, and said : “I want you to go right in the market and buy the number of shares it will take, so you will have a majority of the total number of shares outstanding,” Fox states : “Our arrangement with the Government was that we would own no more than 400,000 .shares of stock. I was told to buy these in individual names ; that I didn’t have to buy them in the name of the company. Stuart said, ‘For goodness sake, own the majority, or jmu will be wiped out here. You can see your danger.’ “Several days later (Fox now speaking) the representative of the Telephone Company called and said, ‘You are in a fine spot, aren’t you? You had better hurry and buy these shares before someone else does.’ I followed the advice, and bought 260,900 additional shares in individual names, some in my name and some in the names of my children, etc. . . .” In other words, though the Department of Justice, which represented the United States Government, told Fox that he must not acquire control of Loew, he, at the insistence of the bankers, went out and bought control, and because he had promised the Government that he would not do it he had bought the shares necessary for control in individual names. What do you call a man when he gives his word to an individual and then breaks it? And what do you call him when he gives his word to the United States Government and then breaks it? Perhaps here again we have a case of the cat and the cheese, only on a bigger scale. And then he has the brass to say (On page iii, last paragraph), that he had acquired the habit to do everything in the open ! W’as this done in the open? Among those whom Fox attacks in his book is Winfield Sheehan. Now, I would not have brought up this subject if it were not for the fact that Fox is presenting Sheehan as ungrateful. Fortunately, I have been in the picture business since the time Fox started producing pictures and I feel qualified to express an opinion as to whether Fox is justified in his accusation. Contrary to his boasts, the Fo.x Film Corporation had not occupied a high standing in the in{Contimied on last page)