Harrison's Reports (1943)

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 by United States $15.00 Rr^mlftl? Harrison's Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 ivoom loiA Publisher Canada 16.50 New York, N. Y. P. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 .■««•<.■ -n * -o • • o • PrpTt Rritiin 1K7K A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Australia New ' Zeala^ Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 India, Europe, Asia .... 17.50 ^. . , ^ ,. -n m -r^ ^ tx -r-,^,.. , i ' Its Editorial Policy: No Problem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 ,55c a copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXV SATURDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1943 No. 51 IS ARBITRATION IN THIS INDUSTRY BANKRUPT? Arbitration is undoubtedly the best method of settling business disputes, for it is generally inex' pensive, and can effect a settlement in the shortest time possible, provided it is conducted fairly. When arbitration was first introduced in this in' dustry in 1926, the producers so controlled it that the District Court for the Southern New York District declared the system then used illegal. For several years afterwards there was no organized arbitration in the industry. Only now and then a case was arbitrated, but it was done individually. When the Government brought arbitration again by means of the Consent Decree, we all hoped that it would be carried on so fairly that there would be no complaint. Unfortunately such has not been the case. In going over a copy of the Pacific Coast Conference's survey, which has been submitted to the Department of Justice, I read the following : "One of the first (cases) on the Pacific Coast to be taken to the Appeal Board was Piedmont Theatre, Inc., vs. Paramount Pictures, Inc., et al., decision and opinion No. 21. "A brief resume of this representative case will demonstrate to the Department of Justice the reason independent exhibitors on the Pacific Coast chose to suffer the injustices practiced upon them rather than submit to Arbitration under the Consent Decree. "This case involved a simple matter of Clearance. The transcript consisted of eight volumes — 994 pages. A single copy cost the complainant $372.85. Seven attorneys, thoroughly familiar with all of the technicalities of the motion picture industry, appeared against the complainant. On appeal complainant was faced with five more attorneys. "The hearing lasted eight days — over the period from October 28, 1941, to and including November 18, 1941. The defendants and intervenors introduced 89 exhibits, to complainant's 1 5 . If there had been no interruptions, complainant could have put in its case in one-half day. Its evidence, under such circumstances, would have filled a great deal less than one volume of the transcript. Much of the transcript consists of discussion between counsel with respect to technicalities raised by attorneys for defendants and intervenors in regard to a proper interpretation of the language of the Consent Decree. "The arbitrator, Mr. Donovan O. Peters, one of the leading lawyers on the Pacific Coast, personally and at his own expense, examined the theatres involved and checked conflicting facts. He found, as a matter of fact, that the clearance complained of as applied by defendant distributors to complainant's theatre was unreasonable. As a result of this finding of fact, the arbitrator then proceeded to set the maximum clearance. Although there was a material conflict upon each of the issues involved, the Appeal Board, sitting 3000 miles from the theatres and the area involved, reversed the arbitrator's findings of fact, and by so doing violated one of the most fundamental rules of appelate procedure. "After winning the case, the complainant, of course, felt justified in fighting the appeal taken by certain of the defendants and intervenors. Complainant was thereby forced to answer the numerous briefs filed against it. "A conservative estimate of complainant's costs, ineluding complainant's share of shorthand and reporters' fees, expenses of witnesses, exhibits, cost of filing appeal, cost of printing briefs on appeal and reasonable attorneys' fees, would be $1500. "The Department of Justice asked for the actual experiences of independent theatre exhibitors under the Consent Decree. The above is one concrete example of arbitration under the Consent Decree. It is little wonder that, after learning of the experiences of this exhibitor, the other independent exhibitors came to the conclusion that arbitration was not an easy, inexpensive method for settling their disputes." Thus arbitration is again perverted to the benefit of the distributors. How can an exhibitor afford to hire five or six attorneys to face an equal number of attorneys hired by the distributors? And how many exhibitors can afford so much cost for each case? Any wonder that the exhibitors avoid arbitration? EXCHANGES UP AGAINST EMPLOYEE SHORTAGE If you should happen to find a reel from another picture in the picture you are showing, don't be surprised. The exchanges are so short of help, particularly in the film inspection rooms, that anything may happen. Lately they have been employing in all departments women, but their employment in the film inspection rooms does not help much, for they lack the necessary experience. Every exhibitor understands, of course, what it means to employ inexperienced film menders; the patching is done faultily, and scenes are found where they do not belong. It would be wise for the careful exhibitors to have their projectionist inspect the films before showing, watching the code numbers that are printed on the side of the film, outside the sprocket holes; they can detect any misplaced scene that way. Harrison's Reports wishes its subscribers and readers the greetings of the season.