Memorandum for His Excellency, the Governor of New York, in opposition to an act entitled "To regulate the exhibition of motion pictures, creating a commission therefor, and making an appropriation therefor." (1921)

Record Details:

Title:
Memorandum for His Excellency, the Governor of New York, in opposition to an act entitled "To regulate the exhibition of motion pictures, creating a commission therefor, and making an appropriation therefor."
Date:
1921
Publisher:
New York
Volume:
Memorandum for His Excellency, the Governor of New York, in opposition to an act entitled "To regulate the exhibition of motion pictures, creating a commission therefor, and making an appropriation therefor."
Leaf #:
0007
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
University of California Libraries
Sponsor:
MSN
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
July 19, 2022
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.

(A)' THE NATURE OF THE LEGISLATION. The Supreme Court went far. Its decision does not foreclose discussion whether the principle of censorship should be applied in this instance. We may still assert that any censorship is an extreme and drastic^ measure that should be resorted to only as a finality of legislation contrary to, if not contradictory of, the fundamentals of liberty in this Republic. A statute for censorship under the Police Power one of the sovereign powers of the State is not to be lightly passed. It should be based on reason, nor is it to be enacted arbitrarily or capriciously. People vs. Grisivold, 213 N. Y. 97, per Miller, J., for the Court. The need should be crying and cogent. As late as 1904 Professor Freund in his standard work on the Police Power said: (Page 421) "The Criminal law is generally adequate for "dealing with obscene plays or shows— People vs. "Doris, 14 App. Div. N. Y. 117. Censorship does "not exist in America and may be regarded as "prohibited by the spirit^/ of the Constitution— "Daily vs. Supreme Court, 112 Cal. 114." (B) THE WI&DOM OF LEGISLATION OF SUCH NATURE IN THIS INSTANCE. This act imposes censors upon a legitimate business, one not only innocent but capable of being educational and instructive. The business is not in the category of the dram shop, the bowling alley, or the shop for the sale of drugs, nor one that supports the burden of justifying its existence. In fine, its character does not require nor does not justify license regulation. We venture the state- ment that in hundreds of moving pictures exhibited daily in this state there fs nothing to criticise and much to commend, not only as innocent amusement but as in- structive and enlightening, even to the teaching of some