Motion Picture Commission : hearings before the Committee on Education, House of Representatives, Sixty-third Congress, second session, on bills to establish a Federal Motion Picture Commission (1978)

MOTION PICTUKE COMMISSION, 57 It may be of interest to the committee, however, to have the history of that national body. Notwithstanding what the gentleman has just said regarding its powers, I want to say that it has very definite man- datory powers, but not legal, and you will realize the distinction. The body was formed in March, 1909, at the request of local exhibitors of New York City, a request that was presented to the People's Insti- tute of New York City, and they immediately took up what eventually became the board of censors, at the request of the exhibitors, perhaps not all of them, but many of them. The work that was done from March to June, 1909, was of such a high character that in the month of June the licensed manufacturers asked the People's Institute to undertake a national censorship, offering to place all of their films under their inspection, and voluntarily banding themselves together to abide the mandatory decisions of that body. So you will remember in all of this discussion that there is defi- nitely a national board of censors to-day with mandatory powers. We pass upon 98 per cent of all the films that are shown in this countr}^ The 2 per cent of the films only being those that are called feature films, and those few that are brought in. as it is generally called by the board, for private use, and also the independents, a very small number, who have not gone into this arrangement. The manufacturers, in other words, who have entered into this arrange- ment are the 10 great producing companies such as the Edison, Vita- graph, Pathe Freres, and those that are very well known. It is un- necessary to mention all of them. There are now, indeed, more than 10, and these licensed companies, as they are known in the trade, are members of this arrangement. Mr. Fess. The statement that you censor 98 per cent and yet have no legal authority to do it indicates that the producers look upon it with favor. Dr. Carter. Yes. sir: that is the thing that I want to marlc. I want you to notice, gentlemen, that T am trying to be politic in my address. I do not believe any of you know on which side of the ques- tion I am as yet. T want to present my personal unbiased view of this whole situation before I state my perst)nal convictions. It is very apparent fi-om the statement of the gentleman who preceded me that there is no definite idea as to the constitution or ]>owers of this board. Mr. Towner. You say that you censor 98 ])er cent of all the films in the United States? Dr. Carter. Yes. Mr. Towner. Would that mean, then, that 98 per cent of all the films that are exhibited here in tlie city of Washington are censored by you ? Dr. Carter. Yes. sir; in absolutely every town and village in the United States. You do not realize, gentlemen, that of course there must be a great distributing center. There is a great film exchange in New York City, and of course there are branch exchanges. The men Avho are in the business know how many there are on the Pacific coast and elsewhere. In our national board in New York City we have 135 people divided up into 8 sections of that national board to pass upon all of these matters. It is a voluntary, and, of course, unpaid committee, without salaries, save for the office force of 4 sec- retaries.