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.
36 MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION. Mr. Treadway. Too much in what Avay ? Mr. Chase. It would be more than the expenses of this commission. If there are 300,000 pictures shown and they are licensed, that would be $300,000. Mr. Treadavay. But would not the license run over more than the period of a year? Mr. Chase. Yes, sir; the license is forever. Mr. Abercrombie. Did you say there were 300.000 pictures a year? Mr. Chase. Yes, countingf duplicates. They have one i)icture originally, and then ther^ Avill be 50, GO, or 75 duplicates, and we charge for each one. It will save, and I should be in favor of saying $1 for the original and 50 cents for all duplicates, because you really only see the original picture and the duplicates you do not care anything iibout, except to know that they are true copies of the original. This hiw, unless it has been changed under Dr. Crafts's direction, provides that they may grant a certificate and seal for a duplicate without inspection, that is, if they have a thoroughly reliable manufacturing house that they are dealing with and in which they thoroughly believe. But if they found anyboch' going back on them or if their faith was violated then they could demand the inspection of everything. Mr. Abercrombie. Do all of the 300.000 produced actually go into interstate comjnerce ? Mr. Chase. In saying 300,000 I am taking Mr. Pringle's state- ment. I have never made any very great attempt to find out the exact number. Mr. ABERCRo:Nn5iE. But it is your opinion that practically all of them go into interstate commerce? Mr. Chase. Yes; that is my idea. Now, then, there is one other provision. This would make a new section, a secti(m just before the end. It would be section l-t and secti<m 14 would l)e section 15, and it reads as follows: The refusal of the board to ,mant a license shall be subject to a review by a court of three justices of the Supreme Court of ihe District of Columbia. The censorship of the stage in England, as I told you, is final, but it Avould seem to me best to ha\c souie court of review, but it is not wise to have a manufacturer able to pick out any one t'ourt or any one justice and secure an injunction. It seemed to me far better to have a court composed of at least three judges of a court of record to i)ass upon any questions that uiay be brought up because of any action taken by the board. There is one possible change in section 4. The word "censorship" is not used in this bill; the word "license" is used. It is really the same word, but more nearly answers the purj^ose of this bill. A cen- sorship is an arbitrary thing without any aj)i)eal, but a licen.se is something that is granted by a licensing power, and the person ap- plying for it. if he is wrongfully used, has the i-ight to appeal to some other person. Now. this l)ill is ofi'ered for this reason : That it is the most etl'ective way of seeing that the United States laws are enforced. My oppo- nents have always claimed that there was the police poAvcr in any locality, and that if the kx'ality did not like the enforcement of the law that thev were the ones that shoidd come forwa.xl and view it.