In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Page scan 000352 from In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants

Record Details:

Title:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants
Date:
1913
Publisher:
New York, Appeal Printing Co.
Volume:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants : record volume 1
Leaf #:
000352
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Early Cinema
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
These seven volumes contain the testimonies and supporting documents from the U.S. District Court's antitrust lawsuit against the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC). Formed in 1908, the MPPC (sometimes referred to asœ"the Edison Trust" or just "the Trust") sought to control the American film industry through pooling patents and demanding that producers and exhibitors acquire licenses to those patents. Independent producers and exhibitors, who refused to license the patents, argued that the MPPC was an unlawful monopoly. In 1912 and 1913, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania heard testimonies from both MPPC members, such as Siegmund Lubin, and "Independents" who later became Hollywood moguls, such as William Fox. Ultimately, in 1915, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the MPPC in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and spelled the end for the already weakening MPPC. -- Eric Hoyt, 2012
Date Added:
September 12, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

330 William Pelzer, Direct Examination Q. Did you ask them how that figure appeared in the minutes as a specific figure, or figures? A. I didn't ask that specific question, no. Q. Or how that figure was determined upon? A. No, I did not ask that question. Q. As the amount that was authorized for the purchase of those exchanges? A. No, I didn't ask that question. Q. Mr. Pelzer, when the General Film Company was formed, how much common stock was issued? A. Actually issued, I think originally there was either five, or 105 shares, and subsequently the balance of the one thousand shares was issued. Q. What amount of common stock has been issued? A. 1,000 shares. Q. That is f 100,000? A. Yes, sir. Q. That was all issued for cash? A. Yes, sir. Q. How much of the preferred stock has been issued? A. Complete — 7959 shares. Q. That is $795,000? A. Yes, sir. Q. And that had been issued to exchanges in part pay ment of properties acquired? A. Except for a few shares which were issued for cash. I think there were eleven shares for cash. Q. The General Film Company has no bonded indebtedness? A. No, sir, outside of the deferred cash payments that might be so considered. Q. What did the General Film Company expend in acquiring these fifty-seven exchanges? A. Do you mean in cash, or in cash and stock? Q. In cash, leaving out the stock, you have named the stock figures? A. I cannot give you the exact amount, but it is in the neighborhood of $1,200,000. Q. A large part of this $1,200,000 is in deferred payments, isn't it? A. There were deferred payments that have been met, and the balance is something over $900,000, to be paid. Q. To be paid? A. Yes, sir, in approximately two and one-half years. Q. That is to say, the General Film Company has paid out $1,200,000 in cash for the exchanges acquired, and now owes about $900,000 on its purchases? A. Yes, over $900,000.