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.
Protection <^><^<^<^<^>^><^^> 219
salaries and other expenses. And the zoning rearrangement was the straw that floated their way.
There is no question in my mind that Will Hays realizes fully that protection, as it is now practiced by the producer chains, is illegal, and that he has made an effort to convince the producers that they had better change their tactics before they have another Thacher decision. . . . (The government's case against West Coast Theaters was pending at that time.)
It is manifest that the object of Mr. Hays in bringing exhibitors and producer-exhibitors together to readjust zoning and protection was to give such an agreement the appearance of legality; he could tell the government that it was put in force by an understanding between the parties affected. But in so doing, he used the same old politicians who employed the same old tactics in an attempt to influence the acts of the exhibitors.
In fighting against protection as the producers intend it to be applied, the independent exhibitors are fighting for a principle. They feel that the system is illegal, and to accept the Hays offer for its settlement, no matter what such settlement might be, would be equal to compromising a principle. They want the question determined, not by the producers and exhibitors, but by the courts. If the courts should declare the system legal, they will bow to the will of the law ; if they should declare it illegal, they want it banished altogether. Another reason for their refusing to take part in such conferences is the fact that, if the system is illegal, they would run afoul of the law by becoming parties to fixing prices and to imposing other conditions upon the American public.
In July, 1930, the independent exhibitors of northern Illinois (Chicago district) discontinued negotiations for a rearrangement of zoning and for making protection standard, refusing to accept the terms of the producers. In Dallas, Texas, the local exhibitor organization also went on record against the producer-made zoning and protection terms. According to A. H. Cole, president of Allied Theater Owners of Texas, the Dallas Film Board of Trade called a meeting for Monday, July 28. The call was made after Publix theaters had demanded a protection ranging from 30 to 50 miles in radius. The exhibitors' organization, however, at a meeting called for the purpose of discussing its attitude towards the proposals, refused to take any part in the nego