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 PICTUEE COMMISSION. 145 form to a re^ilation in the interest of the protection of the public peace. In New York a preacher can not go out and preach on the street or in a public park unless he has the permission of the mayor or of the aldermen. In other words his right of free speech is subject to reasonable regulation under the police power of the State. In ascertaining what the Constitution of the United States or of any of the original States means where it guarantees freedom of the press or of speech, we are helped by going to English law and usage. For the wording of our constitutions and of the bill of rights and our common law was taken from England. In 1693, a century after Milton made his plea for it, Parliament abolished the censorship of the press. Yet in 1727 censorship of the stage, as it had existed for centuries, was legalized by an act of Parliament. Four times in the last 70 years special committees of Parliament have reported against abolishing the censorship of the stage. It is evident that in England the censorship of the stage is not understood to conflict with the freedom of the press as estab- lished by Parliament. What this bill requires is two things, regulation with reference to motion pictures in interstate commerce and also regulation of ex- hibitions in the District of Columbia and the Territories. What it requires in the District of Columbia and the Territories is that any film which is to be shoAvn for pay must have a license, but a picture ma}^ be made and shown in your house to your friends or at a politi- cal club, in a church or in a theater without any charge of admission, and there is no requirement of a license for that film. Mr. Powers. I have no question about the interstate feature of it, but I would like to hear you on the proposition as to exhibits in the Territories, as to whether or not the Federal Government has a right to pass such a law? Dr. Chase. That is what I am speaking about in a way now. It is similar to what Judge Towner suggested with reference to the United States mails. The United States mail officials have the right to examine any book or paper that is suspected of being obscene and throw it out of the mails. The mails are privileged places. The United States Postmaster has the right to say that a book which he pronounces immoral shall not go through the mails, even though no court has pronounced it contrary to law. Places of amusements are places licensed for pub- lic entertainment, and all that this bill says is that nothing shall go through those places unless it has been licensed by the proper repre- sentatives of the Government. It is somewhat similar to the power of the local government to prescribe textbooks for the public schools, what arithmetic, what geography, etc., what books shall be used in certain places. Mr. Powers. The Federal Government does not do that as to the States ? Dr. Chase. Not as to the States, but as to the Territories. I am speaking of this question with regard to the Territories where the United States Government has the power. Mr. Powers. There is no question that the Government has the power to do that, to regulate it as far as the District of Columbia and