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 000619 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 4
Leaf #:
000619
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.

Chester W. Sawin, Cross Examination. 2409 Thereupon CHESTER W. SAWIN resumed the stand. Cross examination by Mr. Grosvenor : Q. Mr. Sawin, you have not been manager at Washington for the General Film Company very long, have you? A. No, sir, I have not. Q. How long have you been manager there? A. Since September first, of this year. Q. You stated on direct examination that you thought the total number of theatres in all cities in your territory was two hundred and seventy-five. On what did you base that figure? A. I believe I stated I figured that there were 275 in the cities in which our office had customers. That my information relative to the other cities in which I did not have customers is not correct, because I have not been able to get it as yet. Q. Now, my question is, upon what do you base your answer that there are 275 theatres in the cities in which you have customers? A. Upon our records, and the reports of our traveling representatives, and inquiries which we receive, and the records of such theatres as have discontinued our service from time to time. Q. I suppose that you included among those 275 the theatres in Richmond? A. I did not include theatres in Richmond, except only such as we serve. I believe I stated in my direct testimony that the theatres served by the Philadelphia branch were not included. Q. Had not been included in what? A. The 275. Q. You included all other theatres in Richmond in the number 275? A. Only those we serve in the 275, not those served by the Philadelphia office. Q. Well, are there independent theatres in Richmond? A. Yes, sir. Q. When you say there are 275 theatres in the cities in which you have customers, you include in that number 275 the theatres in Richmond? A. I did not include only the theatres that we serve in Richmond. Q. Why did you leave out the independent theatres? A. T gave that in my direct examination, that I didn't include those. My records only show those we have, because Philadelphia takes care of the larger part of Richmond. Q. Did you make any examination of your record before coming down here to give that number, 275? A. Yes, sir. 1