Harrison's Reports (1939)

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 Reports • Yearly Subscription Rates : 1270 SIXTH AVENUE Published Weekly byUnited States $15.00 P,w«w 1 ftl 9 Harrison's Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 IMWffl iOl« Publisher Canada 16.50 New York, N. Y. P. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 . „, .. _. . _ . _ . Great Britain 15 75 A Motlon Picture Reviewing Service Australia, New Zealand, Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 India, Europe, Asia .... 17.50 ,c„ „ /-vmv Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 15 c a ^opy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXI SATURDAY, MARCH 18, 1939 No. 11 UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATIONS NOT BINDING AND MAY EVEN NULLIFY A CONTRACT The March 8 Service Bulletin, published by Pete Wood, business manager of Independent Theatre Owners of Ohio, contains the following interesting news item under the heading, "Hard to Erase the Spots" : "We were just complimenting ourselves upon the improvement in the ethics of the industry when 'Up Pops the Devil' and gives us a resounding slap in the kisser. "The 'devil' in this case is United Artists, who pulled a fast one by changing the price allocations in the Edward Small and Hal Roach current contracts. These changes were made after the exhibitor had signed the contracts (and without his permission), through the medium of an added provision 'rubber-stamped' upon the exhibitor's copy of the approved contract. "It has been sometime since any major company resorted to an act of this nature and, as United Artists had absolutely no right to add this provision to the contract without the express permission of the exhibitor, we urge all exhibitors whose contracts were so changed to write to United Artists that, in the event fewer pictures than the number called for in the Small and Roach contracts are delivered, the total rentals for the delivered pictures shall not exceed the amount of the rental stated in the contracts. "We ask each and every member who bought these pictures to look at his approved copy of the contract and advise this office if there has been added to the 'exhibitor's copy' of the contract a rubber stamp provision which does not appear in the 'Application for Contract' left with him at the time he signed the contract." That any one in United Artists should resort to such tactics in these days is astounding. If Mr. Wood's information is accurate, the alteration in the contract has occurred, either at the exchange, or at the Home Office ; and has been made, not by a salesman, but by a responsible official. United Artists owes an explanation of this incident to the independent theatre owners of the United States. As a matter of fact, Allied States should take a hand in this matter with a view to identifying the guilty official and passing his name along to the exhibitors. Regarding Pete Wood's advice to the exhibitors of his territory as to what they should do in case any of them have found their contracts altered, allow me to say that a clause inserted into the contract without the knowledge of the exhibitor is not binding. Under the laws of some states, I am informed, such contracts may be entirely nullified. Mr. Pete Wood should, therefore, find out what the law in this regard is in the State of Ohio, with the view of advising the members of his organization. When your contract is altered by any distributor, irrespective of whether the alteration has been made by a minor or by a major official, just disregard the new provision, so informing the distributor; and if the exchange should try to compel you to live up to the provisions of the unauthorized alteration, you should notify this office to that effect. PUBLIC BACKING OF AN INDEPENDENT THEATRE OWNER According to Main Line Times, of Ardmore, Pennsylvania, the Bryn Mawr Business Association has appealed to the Department of Justice to order the operators of the Ardmore Theatre "and producers and distributors associated with them (Warner Bros. ) to cease and desist" from discriminating against the Seville Theatre. Copies of the resolution were sent also to many United States Senators, as well as to most of the film companies. The move of the Bryn Mawr Business Association was prompted by the suit that had been brought by Harry Fried, owner of the Seville, the Suburban, and the Anthony Wayne theatres, against the distributors who are now supplying films to the Ardmore, charging conspiracy in restraint of trade, as a result of their withholding all their films from his theatres until after they have been shown at the Ardmore. According to this newspaper, a committee of the business association found indications of discrimination, detrimental to the interests of the community in that it affected Bryn Mawr's cultural advantages. It found that chain theatres "retain all options, privileges and prerogatives in the conduct of the business by controlling the date of exhibition of respective films and it appears to the committee that no remedy, other than an action at law, is available to correct this seeming discrimination against the citizens and the best interests of Bryn Mawr. . . . " The Bryn Mawr Business Association has taken this action despite an address given to it by the manager of the Ardmore Theatre in an attempt to justify the company's policy, as bringing better pictures to the towns of the Main Line. {Continued on last page)