| Mrs. Elizabeth Dalton | Teresa Maxwell-Conover. |
| Grace Dalton | Helen Freeman. |
| Theodore Thompson | Milton Sills. |
| Jack Bud | Joseph Kilgour. |
| John Watts | Albert Bruning. |
| Harold Dalton | Eugene O’Brien. |
| A Bellevue Doctor | Harry C. Browne. |
| Attendants | James Grove. Mark Powers. |
| Servant | Judith Snaith. |
The following letter on the subject of the Goldknopf accusations gave Belasco much satisfaction:
(The Society of American Dramatists and Composers to David Belasco.)
“New York, November 27, 1912.
“Dear Mr. Belasco:—
“At a special meeting of the Board of Directors of The Society of American Dramatists, held immediately after witnessing the performances of ‘The Woman’ and ‘Tainted Philanthropy,’ a resolution was passed congratulating and thanking you for your splendid work in behalf of the dramatists of America in having called the attention of the public and the press to the efforts of irresponsible writers and lawyers against authors and producers of successful plays. We are of the opinion that these ‘strike’ suits, having no basis or ground for legal action, are a great hardship to the professional dramatist, and [that] the attention of the Bar Association should be called to this particular suit as an aggravated instance of sharp practice and unwarranted attack on the dramatist’s name and pocket.
“Yours most sincerely,
“Charles Klein,
“Secretary.”
In his decision Judge Holt said:
“This suit is to restrain the [alleged] infringement of a copyright.... Both pieces have been presented by experienced and skilful actors, with excellent scenery and stage appointments. I have carefully read the manuscripts of each play and have seen the representations of them.... In my opinion the proof wholly fails to establish the charge. There is nothing to prove, or to suggest, such a comparison of the two plays—that ‘The Woman’ was copied from ‘Tainted Philanthropy,’ or that any part of the one was taken from any part of the other. There is nothing to indicate that either the words, the ideas, or the plot of the defendant’s play were suggested by complainant’s play. The two plays, in my opinion, are wholly dissimilar, and I see no ground whatever for the charge that one infringed the copyright of the other in any particular. There should be a decree for the defendants, dismissing the bill on the merits, with costs.”
Final judgment to that effect was entered March 3, 1913. Belasco’s unique demonstration of the shameful injustice of the Goldknopf charge, however, cost him $5,700. Writing on the subject of this suit and of the performances offered in evidence in it, he has said: