Camera - April 14, 1923 to February 16, 1924 (April 1923-February 1924)

*ynOW ftjnf if the Htm, Man M4)|f Ummal T deluding ^JW $\lm flV\bXQXi » " THE WORLD'S GREATEST F1LMPAPER Hollywood, California Telephone 439-869 Established 1918 S. W. LAWSON, Publisher GEORGE HIVELY, Studio Representative PAULINE THOMPSON, Auxiliary Edit GENE WOOLWAY, Studio Representati Volume VI. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1924 No. THE SPIRIT OF FAIR PLAY [In the Case of Gaston Glass] By Fred W. Fox How fickle the public is! Quick to condemn and as quick to forget . . . and oftimes forgive. In the giddy whirl of hasty judgment based on circumstantial evidence it very rarely recedes to a sensible survey of things. I refer in this instance to the case of our fellow-actor Gaston Glass who was unfortunately implicated in a recent affray that provided lurid headlines for scandalous metropolitan dailies from coast to coast. Since that time Gaston has not fared so well, cinematically speaking. The other participants are permitted to pursue their own paths unmolested, but it seems that Gaston has been made "the goat." Evidently some of those interests so bitterly antagonistic to the motion picture profession are of the opinion the mental anguish that must have ensued in Gaston's case is insufficient punishment. For not so long ago as I sat in the stronghold of our flighty friend Shuler I heard this ultra-rabid member of the obnoxious "reform" element make some very insulting references to the unfortunates of Filmdom. Arbuckle, of course, was mentioned and so was Mabel Normand. But Gaston Glass was no doubt Shuler's pet peeve. In the course of his maligning he avowed he was a strict advocate of those measures intended to definitely bar Glass and the others from the screen. His reason was that the screen was the greatest of today's factors in molding thoughts and ideals and that it would be mentally and morally in jurious for any of the coming generation to see Arbuck Normand, Glass and the others continue on the silv sheet after such unsavory publicity had been linked w their names. Yet he did not give any consideration that old saying, "to the pure all things are pure." Naturally if one goes to the theater for the expril purpose of seeing Glass or the others because "th were the ones in that Hollywood wild party" that thouf will permeate the mind throughout the entire pictuBut if one goes to see Gaston Glass, the actor, it is appreciate him as an artist and not as a personality.-; This is not an attempt to excuse any of these folk I their indiscreet conduct; it is just an appeal for a sa survey of the matter. At the time of the Glass incide even the newspapers intimated that interests antagoni» to those who figured in the party had "framed up" I the avowed purpose of blackening their reputations the eyes of the national public. If there be any tn whatsoever in that it certainly has not met with even t most mediocre success for reports from all parts of t country seem to indicate that Gaston Glass still retai a spot in the hearts of those who seek romance at t motion picture theaters of America. Louis J. Gasnier, who also figured in the incident, h experienced no halt in his activities and his productio Edited by FREDWFOX "CAMERA!" The Digest of the Motion Picture Industry, including THE FILM TRIBUNE, The World's Greatest Filmpaper, issued Saturday morning of each week at 6318 Hollywood Boulevard, Hollywood, California. Entered as second-class matter August 11th, 1918, ft post-office at Los Angeles, California, under the piovisions of the Act of March 3rd, 1879. Published by the Camera-Tribune Publishing Compl with executive and editorial offices at 6318 Hollywood Boulevard, Hollywood, California. National advertising representatives H. H. Conger C« pany, Sew York, Chicago and San Francisco. Subscription Rates: $3.50 per year in Los Angeles County; $4.00 per year in outside tone; $4.50; year to Canada; $5.00 per year to foreign points. Address all communications to the company. All unsolicited manuscripts are sent at the tn er's risk.