ISHPEMING — In December of 1910 and January of 1911 an interesting court case — People vs. C. S. Sullivan –gripped the citizens of Ishpeming.

C. Sullivan, owner of the Royal Moving Picture Theatre was “charged with violating a state statute in opening his house on Sunday.” (Mining Journal, December 14, 1910) Sullivan was represented by P.H. O’Brien of Calumet and T.J. Dundon of Ishpeming.

Prosecuting Attorney Bell conducted the case for the people of Ishpeming.

“It required the greater part of the forenoon to secure a jury, as the attorneys on both sides objected to a number of the men drawn. The hearing opened at 1:30 o’clock. At no time during either the forenoon or afternoon was the court room large enough to accommodate the spectators, and while the attorneys were arguing the case the crowd extended out into the street.” (Mining Journal, December 14, 1910)

“The arguments of Messrs. O’Brien and Bell were interesting. Each talked for the greater part of an hour. Mr. O’Brien enumerated the various ways in which the Sunday law is being violated in Ishpeming. He declared that if one class of violations are tolerated all should be.” (Mining Journal, December 14, 1910)

“Mr. Bell appealed to the jury to decide against the operation of the moving pictures on Sunday on the ground that to allow them to run would mean that other violations of the Sunday law would follow. He said that a decision in favor of Mr. Sullivan would probably mean that Ishpeming would be a wide-open town on Sunday and that the law would be generally violated.” (Mining Journal, December 14, 1910)

The jury deliberated for nearly three hours but could not come to an agreement.

“At a mass meeting held yesterday afternoon (December 18) in the First Methodist church, called for the purpose of giving expression to the sentiment against the opening of moving picture theaters on Sunday, over 300 people were present, and all voted in favor of taking the necessary legal steps to enforce the law.” (Mining Journal, December 19, 1910)

Many of the clergymen in attendance at the meeting spoke and for the most part, their comments ran along similar lines. “Rev. C.S. Robinson gave an interesting talk in which he declared that personally he did not object to pictures, whether they were moving or stationary. He said he liked pictures of all kinds and that he would have nothing whatever to say against the moving pictures, but he declared himself as opposed to the violation of the Sunday law. He said that if the law gave the proprietors of these places the right to run on Sunday, alright, but as they are not given the right they should be compelled to close.” (Mining Journal, December 19, 1910)

“Inasmuch as D.E. Rice opened his moving picture theater, in the Quayle block, yesterday afternoon and evening, it is assumed that the committee appointed at the mass meeting held yesterday afternoon in the First Methodist Episcopal church will have a double fight on its hands, instead of a fight only against C.S, Sullivan, proprietor of the Royal Theater, in the Voelker block, who had his place open for business the past six Sundays.

“It is not known whether Mr. Rice will be arrested today on the charge of violating a state statute, but it is thought that the church committee, which was instructed to cooperate with the mayor, will bring Rice into the fight along with Sullivan. Both houses did good business yesterday, particularly in the evening. The crusade against the moving picture people has been very much discussed in the homes of the city the past few weeks” (Mining Journal, December 19, 1910)

“The members of the committee appointed at the mass meeting of church people, held Sunday afternoon in the First Methodist Episcopal church, with instructions to take the necessary legal steps to compel the proprietors of the moving picture theatres to close their places on Sunday, called on Prosecuting Attorney Bell to talk the matter over. At the conclusion of the conference Mr. Bell instructed Judge Andrews to summon the proprietors of both the Royal theaters and their employees into court on Thursday morning, the 29th, at 9 o’clock to show cause why judgement should not be rendered against them for violating the state statue.” (Mining Journal, December 20, 1910.)

The hearing on the 29th of December had to be postponed, as one of the attorneys in the case, T.J. Dundon, was ill. A new date of January 13th was set for the hearing.

“The council held its January meeting Wednesday evening, but as only the routine business was disposed of the session did not last long. The committee on ordinances and legislation has prepared an ordinance prohibiting the operation of moving picture theatres, bowling alleys, pool rooms, etc. on Sunday, but it was not presented, as it is not thought advisable to moving in the matter until the cases now pending against the proprietors and employees of the Royal and Lyric theatres are disposed of.” (Mining Journal, January 6, 1911)

A second jury trial was held on January 6th. It followed along similar lines to the first one, in that selecting a jury took a long time. M.J. Kennedy represented the people, as the prosecuting attorney was absent.

“Mr. O’Brien’s plea was largely upon the question of personal liberty. He said that a great many others besides the defendants in Ishpeming, as well as elsewhere in the Upper Peninsula and throughout the state, are violating the Sunday law. He asserted that the general public here is not opposed to the opening of the moving picture houses on Sunday, but that the fight against the proprietors of the two picture houses is being made almost exclusively by the ministers. He said it was evident from the expressions of the people and from the patronage that the theatres are receiving on Sunday that there are many Ishpeming people who favor having them open on that day.” (Mining Journal, January 7, 1911)

As with the first jury trial, the second one also ended in disagreement.

“The city council passed an ordinance at the special meeting Wednesday, which prohibits entertainments, circuses, shows and moving pictures on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday. The ordinance was put through the council for the purpose of closing the picture shows in the city on Sunday and it will go into effect Feb. 7. Until that date the shows will probably be run unmolested because it has been demonstrated that is it a difficult matter to find a jury that will convict the violators under the state statute. If Messrs. Sullivan and Rice keep there shows open after Feb. 7, they will still be entitled to a jury trial. Under the ordinance the authorities will have power to close their places of business on Sunday which they did not possess under the state law.” (Iron Ore, January 21, 1911)

A third trial was not necessary. “All of the cases against C.S. Sullivan, manager of the Royal theater, and D.E. Rice, proprietor of the Lyric theater, have been settled and the cases dismissed. A trial was set for Wednesday morning, but the defendants appeared in court and pleaded guilty to the charges of keeping their moving picture shows open on Sunday. They were charged $2.50 for each offense.” (Iron Ore, February 11, 1911)