Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1974 - 20

THE LAW LOOKS AT THE THEATRE
EL EANOR B. FE RRA R B ERN AROB ARue H COL LEG E, C. U. N. Y.
Although there are a number of attorneys in New
York City currently practicing in the field of "Theatrical Law," there is, in fact, no such field. Most of
the statutes and regulations which concern theatrical
producers, agents, actors, musicians, technicians and
all those even peripherally involved in professional
theatre are only extensions or specific applications of
laws governing most other business activities.
The financing of a theatrical production, for
example, is regulated by those laws governing the
in itiat ion of any type of busi ness concern. The
regulatory effects of labor relations statutes are not
individually geared to the needs of theatrical artists
and technicians but apply to all areas of labormanagement relationships. Those laws which exist
for the protection of the audience are essentially
stipulated for the protection of the theatre-goer qS a
"consumer" of goods although the "product" he
purchases is an example of intangible property. As
early as 1907, Brackett defined the situation as
follows:
The decisions of the courts on matters pertaining to the stage,
and all the manner of amusements to which the public is
admitted, are no distinct phase of the law, merely an
application of established principles to those particular
subjects. 1

The situation remains basically unchanged.
There is a tendency for artists to attempt to ignore
the taint of association with an area so mundane as
"busi ness." It is, nevertheless, a fact of legal life
that the theatre artists' activities fall under the
jurisdiction of a complex and overlapping structure of
federal, state and city statutes, codes and reg ulatory
provisos. A brief chronological survey of some of the
most important regulations affecting the theatre
gives us an insight into the need for those numerous
theatrical lawyers.
From its earliest history, bolstered by our Puritan
forefathers, American society has never quite been
able to bury its distrust of the theatre:
Legislation on the theatre is, to this day, tainted with those
associations (wastrels, beggars, mountebanks). The least that
can be said of the theatre in its relation to the fundamental law
is that it is under suspicion, that the presumption is against
it. 2

The foregoing opinion was expressed over half a
century ago. Although during that half-century we
have deleted, added to, or amended many legal
restrictions placed on theatre, the underlying current
of suspicion still exists. With this in mind, we can
undertake a brief summary of theatrical legislation
from the past and present centuries.

D§:J

In contem porary society, much of the theatre
audience considers attendance at a theatrical production as a social as well as cultural activity. On the
whole, "seeing a play" is something done in the
company of someone else and is often a weekend
occasion. However, when the law which allowed the
1773 opening of William Hallam's theatre in Boston
was enacted, performances were strictly forbidden on
Saturday evenings. Saturday was the beginning of
the Christian sabbath and could not be corrupted by
any type of theatrical event. It was not until May 1,
1858, that the public was permitted to attend the
theatre on Saturday night in Boston. 3
A few years later, when the theatre began to
make inroads on weekend leisure activity, another
regulation was passed which still affects professional
performance. In 1860, the New York State Legislature passed "An Act to preserve the public peace
and order in the first day of the week, commonly
called Sunday." Th is statute forbade "theatrical"
performances on Sunday, and the penalty for violation of this law was a contribution of $500 to the
Society for Protection of J uven i Ie Del inquents and
loss of one's operating license. By interpretation,
"theatrical" was made to mean that which "has a
curtain which rises and falls, that which uses
costumes and makeup and scene changes and has a
continuous story." 4 As is often the case, the law
provided a loophole for those against whom it was
directed. Because of the exactness of language in the
regulation, variety entertainments could be legally
excluded from this restriction. The present use of the
word "legitimate" to apply to plays shows a current
influence of this early regulation.
As the complexity and scope of theatrical activity
grew in America, a parallel development of regulatory statutes kept pace. By the end of the nineteenth
century, the law was beginning to recognize the
breadth of theatre as a business and economic force
and, as such, an area necessitating certain controls.
Theatrical activities were scrutinized carefully and
licensing was an accepted restriction. In 1897,
Congress enacted a statute which provided that "an
unlawful presentation of a play or musical composition should be punished by a certain money penalty,
and if the performance was willful and for profit, it
should be a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not exceeding one year." 5 The intrusion of the
theatre into the total economic picture was viewed a
bit skeptically by the law.
The end of the nineteenth century saw the
stirrings of the complex labor regulations which exist

THEATRE DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY

DECEMBER. 1974

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1974