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)

MOTIOX PICTUSE COMMISSION. 187 Dr. Ckafts. Yes, sir; but all the pictures that go elsewhere come here also. The fact that that bill passed Congress was certainly evidence of the fact that Congress believed that censorship was needed, and the only objection to it was that the commissioners, with no extra money provided, could not perform the service, and the bill was vetoed for that reason. No cities except the very large cities like Chicago, New York, and some others, can w^ell afford to do censorship work. Where they have a local censor board, as at Fort Worth, for example, composed of three or four people who are serving free of charge, they do not pretend to see all of the films. They see only those that are sus- pected. The expense incurred by a paid local board of censors, such as they have in the city of Chicago, is quite large. Now, State rights are not in any way involved in this bill. It seeks to control what is almost wholly an interstate business. There pre no motion-picture films to speak of that do not go through the whole country. A Federal censorship is necessary for one thing to prevent bad films from getting a copyright. In consultation with the Librarian of Congress I found that when anything has been con- demned by a court as obscene it is denied a copyright. I saw that it would therefore be possible to provide that no copyright should be issued to any film not licensed by the Federal motion-picture commis- sion. Canon Chase has credited me with this bill, but I must say that Canon Chase has given a great deal more attention to it than I have. We have together developed this bill. I do not wish to take all the credit of having prepared what I tliink is going to be one of the most important bills ever enacted by Congress in the interest of good morals. The public sentiment in favor of adequate censorship of films is not something that has to be worked up. The people have long Leen showing they were in favor of it by protests adopted against bad films and by multiplying censor boards. 1 think my time must be about up, but I would be glad to answer any questions. Mr. Abercrombie. Dr. Crafts, don t you. think this bill ought to be so amended as to provide for two classes of approved films, one for adults only and another class for adults and children? Dr. Crafts. I am afraid that would be a very dangerous pro- vision. It would be somewhat like notices of " meetings for men only." Those notices always attract a prurient crowed that would be really disappointed if nothing improper was exhibited. Mr. Abercroinibie. Don't you think it possible for a picture to be good for adults and not be good for children ? Mr. Crafts. I think there are pictures that would be good for &elect audiences. For instance, a phiy like "Damaged Goods," if made into a j^hoto play, might be a good picture to exhibit before an audience of mature minds. I saw " The Traffic in Souls," dealing with the white-slave traffic. It had the approval of the NeAV York censors. That I felt might do good if given to a company of college girls, or of girls fresh from the country, Avith no men present as a Avarning to them against the tricks of the Avhite slavers. But ex- hil)ited before an audience of men and women sitting together, it seemed to me unwholesome, for it shoAved procurers, pimps and