The San Francisco call., 1905-02-04
THEATER FIGHT
GROWS BITTER
Contention That Ordinance
Discrilninates i'm Favor
of the Older Structures
VALIDITY is ATTACKED
Attorney for Cheap Shows
Asks Judge Seawell to
Declare the Measure Void

A significant remark was dropped in
the corridor outside OF Judge Seaweifs
courtroom yesterday by Julius Kahn.
He addressed a member OF the Grand
Jury. He asked: why doesn't your
Foreman Andrews arrest his father-ln-
law, j. d. Pryor. The TivoH has been
reconstructed since this ordinance was
passed"
Pryor owns the Tivoli property, but
the theater was constructed by the
company which manages it. Another
indication that the 10-cent vaudeville
houses believe the older and larger the
aters have a monopoly of the amuSe-
ment business developed in the argu-
ment of Attorney H. c. McPike against
the validity of the ordinance prescrib-
Ing the matter in which theater build
ings shall be constructed.
McPike contended that the ordinance
divides the theaters into two classes
those built after the ordinance was
passed in June. 1901, and those built be-
fore. The new ones, at greatest ex-
pense, and with regard for vigorous
rules, must be built according to the
law. The old ones merely had to be
remodeled, so far as considered neces-
sary' by the Board of Public Works
and the Fire Commissioners. This, de-
clared the attorney, gave the old the
aters monopoly of the business be-
cause of the greater expense attendant
upon the building of new house like
the Majestic. The discrimination, it
was contended, makes the ordinance in
valid, in that it gives arbitrary power
to minor officers to determine in how
far the buildings constructed before the
ordinance was passed shall comply
with its provisions.
District Attorney Byington interrupt
ed with a remark that the argument
nf int h. x-.1f Il
ordinance; the hearing was upon an in
junction restraining the police from
committing certain acts and court of
equity had no power to prevent the
police from doing those acts if the or
dinance was being validated. The court
replied that If the ordinance were
proved invalid it would be so much
waste paper, and the police could not
proceed under 1t. His mind, however,
had been made up that an injunction
could not prevent the arrest Of persons
violating the ordinance if it were not
declared invalid.
McPike admitted that the arrests
could be made. but insisted that in
these cases the police seek to close the
houses and thereby declare a forfeiture
of property which is not provided for
in the ordinance.
Before beginning his argument Nc
Pike offered the evidence of Charles
GOCcnduX, an arChltect, who worked on
the plans of the Majestic With an
enlarged plan, the witness explained
each requirement of the ordinance and
was Of the opinion that the provision
for an open court on the side of the
aters was not a safe protection from
fire, particularly il the adjoining build
ing was of frame. He was asked
whether the terms of the ordinance
were not onerorls, rigid and difficult to
comply with. Nj. Byington offered an
objection which the court sustained.
Other architects were in court to give
evidence on the same points, but the
court declined to hear them.
Julius Kahn, representing the Unique
Theater, informed the court that he
would at the next hearing discuss the
question of licenses, contending that
his theater had paid a license in
1901 and that the Board of Works has
no right TO require a new permit every
year. The hearing was continued
until next Friday