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 000129 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 2
Leaf #:
000129
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.

William H. Swanson, Cross Examination. 747 Q. About what year did you go to Denver? A. It was 1 about two years ago. Q. Have you bad a place there ever since? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you a branch at Salt Lake City? A. Yes, sir. Q. Have you other branches in the West? A. At El Paso. Q. Any others? A. No, sir. Q. And those branches are supplying circuits of their own, are they not? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now this business has been conducted in Denver, or developed in Denver in the past two years, as I understand you? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you make a statement over your own signature to Bradstreet's representative in Denver, on August 2nd, 1911, setting forth your assets and liabilities? A. It seems to me I did, I think I did. I don't know as to the date but I did make a statement. Mr. Grosvenor: I object to that as immaterial, and not proper cross examination, for the reason that it was a subject that was not gone into on direct, anything as to what the witness was earning in the year 1911, which was long after his license was cancelled. Q o By Mr. Kingsley : Q. In that statement did you set out these items: Merchandise at cost, $120,000; accounts and notes receivable, $8,000; cash on hand and in bank, $26,000; interest in W. H. Swanson & Company, Chicago, $100,000; interest in SwansonCrawford Film Company, St. Louis, $150,000 ; interest in Rex Motion Picture Mfg. Co., New York, stated at $80,000; interest in Howard, Thurston & Co., New York City, $28,000; interest New York Museum Company stated at $17,500, total, $529,500. Liabilities : Balance of purchase price of Co-Opera 4 tive Independent Film Company, $13,000. Signed, "William H. Swanson.-' Did you make such a statement? A. I did. I made a statement of that character, but I do not recall the date of it. Q. Did you set out your interest in W. H. Swanson & Company, in Chicago, as $100,000? A. Yes, I presume I did. Q. And did you set out your interest in the CrawfordSwanson Company, St. Louis, at $150,000? A. I don't re