The cinema and the public: a critical analysis of the origin, constitution, and control of the British Film Institute (1934)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to with your comments.

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.

3. GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE. Some of these defects, if not all of them, became apparent, as has been said, in the course of the later Parliamentary Debates ; and that you, Sir, and your colleagues in the Cabinet were conscious of them is shown by the following significant succession of events :— May 2jth y 1932 : Mr. Oliver Stanley, Under- Secretary of State for Home Affairs, welcomed a proposal made by Colonel John Buchan, M.P., in the House of Commons, that a certain propor- tion of the receipts at Sunday cinemas should be set aside to finance a National Film Institute on the lines outlined by the Commission on Educa- tional and Cultural Films.* June i^th y 1932 : Sir Herbert Samuel, Secretary of State for the Home Department, during a discussion by Standing Committee B., asked for an amendment to the above effect to be withdrawn, and suggested in its place a clause whereby the money would be paid to the Privy Council and then allotted by them, either to the institute or to others, for the development of films for educational and cultural purposes. f June zgth, 1932 : Mr. Stanley moved a clause on Report to the effect that the money should be paid into a Cinematograph Fund to be administered by the Privy Council, and applied, not necessarily either to the Institute or to any other organisation concerned with educational or cultural films, but, * Parliamentary Debates —House of Commons—Vol. 266, No. 99, Col. 799. t Parliamentary Debates —House of Commons (Standing Com- mittee B)—June 14th, 1932, Cols. 104-107. Page 18