United Artists Corporate Minutes (Jan-Dec 1939)

Record Details:

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.

June 7th, 1939. a *€ _ Samuel Goldwyn, Inc. . Se 722 Seventh Avenue Coe ~~ FS rl , New York City. ’ Attertion Mr. James A. Mulvey, Vice-President. > et —— Gentlemen: AS explained to your Mr. Mulvey at the United | Artists Meeting held yesterdey, the reason we did not reply to your letter of May Zlst was becsuse of the understending eléerly arrived at between the writer .and Mr. Muivey that there wes to be no reply and the matter was to be kept in abeyance until such time as Mr. Harry Gold had @m opportunity todiscuss the WUSIC SCHOOL and THE REAL GLORY with the Music Hall, with a view of getting an ari cable settiement; you likewise agreed that it was the peeies procecure to try and adjust the thing in a frimdly fashion with “the Music Hall, readily appreciating thet one of these days you micht need the Music Hall for your piectures’ and it was therefore unwise to be on an antagonistic besis with them.. In view of the above, we were srestly surprised. ‘at your attitude in esking thet our letter of May 25rd and you which of course we fiad no objection), but at the same tims we must state that we feel your recuest was not in keeping with the understanding we had. Replying categorically to the points raised in your letter of May Slst: . \ You mention that there wes nothing in the merida" randum to Harry Gold, dated May 17th, thet you ettempted to contrect directly with the Rivoli Theatre. You are poses the sue which is tha out o's nowledze or cons you fee. Wy negoticted wight Rive a, {ndeoendent os us, which we contend you heve no setts to do. You likewise state-thet-in sasceduhes with the vrectice and custom heretofore uniformly followed between us, you have the right to negotiate the terms uron which your pictures should be exhibited. I presume by that state~