Harrison's Reports (1934)

84 HARRISON’S REPORTS May 26, 1934 machinery began functioning so early, and it is he who should “crow.” Next to Mr. Rosenblatt should be Mr. Charles L. O’Reilly, who gave him his whole-hearted support ever since the Code deliberations began, and next to Mr. O’Reilly, Mr. Nathan Yamins, who, ever since the Code Authority meetings began, gave Mr. Rosenblatt the same kind of support as Mr. O’Reilly gave him all along. ARE YOUR INTERESTS LOOKED AFTER WELL ON THE CODE AUTHORITY? You have been told repeatedly that the membership of the Code Authority is so constituted that the independent exhibitors will not get a fair break. The fact that the majority on this body is predominantly “major” has been pointed out to you. That the majority of the Code Authority represents predominantly the big companies there is no doubt; but the statement that because of it the independent exhibitors will not get a “break” is erroneous. There are two men on the Code Authority who are looking after your interests as earnestly and as conscientiously as if they were their own — Charles L. O’Reilly and Nathan Yamins. Mr. Yamins I have known for a long time but only as a loyal subscriber, and from whatever part he had taken in organization affairs. And I always held him in high regard. The first time that I had an opportunity to get close to him was when he became a member of the Code Authority. All I can say is that your interests could not have been entrusted in better hands. He is fair, cool headed, intelligent and a hard worker. As far as Mr. Charles L. O’Reilly is concerned, I have known him intimately for sixteen years and I am able to speak with authority as to what he has done for the cause of the exhibitors. He is responsible for the New York Optional Sunday Opening Bill, which made Sunday opening in this state possible, bringing unaccountable millions to the pockets, not only of the exhibitors of this state, but also of the producers and the distributors. You can figure it out yourself what it would have cost the industry had there been no Sunday opening in this state. Three years ago he, as a prominent member of the Committee, framed the Fire Laws of New York City, which became the model for the nation. They were passed by the Board of Aidermen during the Walker administration. How he fought for your interests at that time you will never know. But every exhibitor of New York City knows it, or at least ought to know it, for a shutting down of their theatres was threatened because of some antiquated fire ordinance that prevented the keeping in the booth more than five reels of films at a time. Three years ago he prevented the imposing of a ten percent tax on the amusements of this state to take care of the unemployed. I know the details of that campaign because I helped Mr. O’Reilly in it. The producer forces had given up hope of preventing that taxation ; they were fully discouraged when Mr. O’Reilly asked that he be given a free hand in the matter. In three days thirty-seven thousand telegrams reached the legislators at Albany. The tax was killed. These are only three of the things he did for the exhibitors and the industry; I can mention at least twenty other major accomplishments of similar nature. Time after time he sav|d the exhibitors of this city and state not only from adverse legislation, but also from annoyance from grafters, who used to prey upon 4he exhibitors. In 1929 he lost two of the most beautiful theatres in New York City, each costing more than a million dollars, for inability to get first-run product, no matter what price he offered. For one of these theatres, the ParkPlaza, he was paying $41,500 a year rent and was losing anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 a week ; but today that same theatre, in the hands of a circuit, is making anywhere from $3,000 to $8,000 a week, even though the rent is $110,000 a year, because it has first-run product. That is why he feels your hurts so deeply. Mr. O’Reilly is very modest when it comes to having his efforts on behalf of the exhibitors acknowledged. He shies at seeing his name in print. And I have no doubt that he will be highly displeased when he reads these lines. But because of some false and misleading statements made about him before the Darrow Board, I felt that it was my duty to present him to you as he really is. That Board was told that Mr. O’Reilly is no longer an exhibitor. Such a statement is unqualifiedly false and malicious. And certainly I ought to know whether he is an exhibitor or not better than people who live miles away from New York, or even in New York itself. During his connection with exhibitor organization affairs, he has never received a dime for salary, and has never collected even one penny of the money he spent either in railroad fare, or in hotel bills, or in any of the one hundred and one other items that call for spending money by an exhibitor leader traveling for the cause. I know that previously to 1929 he used to spend approximately ten thousand dollars a year of his own money for the affairs of the organization. In 1929, Will H. Hays, feeling that he could serve the interests of the industry better if the independent exhibitors belonged to the same organization with the producers, offered Mr. O’Reilly twenty-five thousand dollars a year salary and office space in his quarters to bring the independent exhibitors into the Hays association, to form a separate branch, to be headed by him, that is, Mr. O’Reilly, but he, as much as he needed the money at the time, declined the offer, out of fear of being misunderstood by you, for he values independent-exhibitor good will more than money. And I don’t mind telling you a little secret: it was he who, in 1931, prevented the amalgamation of Allied States with Motion Picture Theatre Owners of America, which was to be subsidized by the Hays association with $100,000 a year, because he felt that such an amalgamation was not for your best interests. Mr. O’Reilly has done, as I have said, many things for exhibitors. But one of the greatest things he has done for them is to save them more than once from spurious exhibitor leadership. And he has never hesitated to support aggressive and sound leaders. There are today hundreds of exhibitors who wish that Mr. Sydney R. Cohen, president of Motion Picture Theatre Owners of America, at one time a real independent exhibitor organization, did not have so many outside interests to claim his time so that he and Mr. O’Reilly once again may join hands to battle for the cause of the independent exhibitors, just as they used to battle in the good old days, before the producers broke up that powerful combination. Mr. O’Reilly foresaw the break-up. Three weeks before the Washington convention in 1922, he and I were having dinner with Mrs. O’Reilly at the Knickerbocker Grill one evening and he told me that Washington would be the grave of the organization : “I see the break-up coming,” he said to me, “but I can’t stop it; they will not listen to me!” And his prophecy came true to the last detail — JimmyWalker, counsel for the organization, was discredited in his attempt to oppose Sydney R. Cohen. What surprises me is that some film concern has not offered to engage him long before this time at fifty thousand dollars at year salary to do nothing else but to act in an advisory capacity' part time ; he is fully worth that Had he been engaged by one of the concerns that went bankrupt, he would undoubtedly have saved it from making the mistakes that brought such a bankruptcy fate upon it My suggestion to you is not to believe the statement that your interests are not receiving adequate protection on the Code Authority just because its membership does not include professional exhibitor leaders. IF YOUR CLEARANCE AND ZONING SCHEDULE SHOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY TO YOU Sometime ago, the Code Authority, at the suggestion of the Warner Bros, representative, passed a resolution to keep the present clearance and zoning schedules as they now are and to instruct the Clearance and Zoning Boards to work out the new schedules to be adopted for the coming selling season. The introduction of this resolution on the part of Warner Bros, was not for your best interests, for the new schedules, by the time they are deliberated upon and the protests on them noted, will not be ready for adoption until the season will be too far gone for them to be of any use. Clearance and zoning schedules should be adjusted to the New Deal now and not next year. If the schedule for your zone is unsatisfactory to you, demand that a new schedule be worked out immediately. If your Local Board will not heed yrour request, telegraph to Mr. Sol A. Rosenblatt, Room 4221 Commerce Bldg., Washington, D.C., requesting him to see to it that a new schedule is set up for your locality.