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)

132 MOTION PICTURE COMMISSION. of the City of New York and also as president of the New York Civic League. I am rector of a church in Brooklyn. My residence is at 481 Bedford Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. I submitted for the record at the first hearing a copy of the argu- ments on both sides of the debate published by the Motion Picture Magazine upon the question of whether motion-picture plays shall be censored or not. The Motion Picture Magazine furnished me with the necessary copies, and our side has sent a copy to each Member of Congress. This contains the statements of both sides of the debate and evinces our desire to have the matter fully presented to Congress. The negative side of this question was defended by Mr. Dyer, who at the time of the debate was president of the General Film Co., the largest commercial enterprise in the trade. The General Film Co. has not yet appeared at any of the hearings before this committee, which is a very significant fact. This morning I desire to reply to the various arguments, fears, and misapprehensions expressed by the opponents of the bill at the last three hearings, when all the time, except 15 minutes at one of the sessions, was taken by them in stating their reasons for opposing the bill. In the first place, the word " censorship " does not properly de- scribe the operation of this bill. The word " censorship'' implies something arbitrary beyond which there is no appeal. The word '' censorship " implies a tyrannical power which may be used arbi- trarily. The word used in this bill is " licensing." The licensing power of the Government is something which has come more largely m use in recent years to meet new social conditions. As society becomes more complex and frauds, cheats, and Aarious kinds of injurious deceits appear, which the ordinary citizen can not detect, it becomes necessary for the Government to appoint s[)ecially trained and specially (lualified representatives to protect the interests nf the whole people. So we find that different uses of the licensing power have been found necessary in order to protect the public. The lawyer is licensed, the doctor is licensed, the man who soils gun- powder is licensed, the man who bells firearms is licensed, and the man who sells drugs is licensed. The place Avhich is safe for the people in which to see plays is licensed. We have our foods in- spected. These are some of the various ways in which the license power is used to protect the people. The next point is that this bill attempts to do what seems to be the sensible thing—that is, to prevent crime rather than to allow it to be committed and then to ])niiish the guilty one. Prevention is one of the indications of the increased elliciency which we expect in the Government to-day. If we find a threat of murder or theft, we do not allow the man to commit nnirder or theft and then punish him; we take eft'ective means to prevent the crime. If we find a mo- tion picture that seems very clearly about to incite adults and children to crime, it is not neces.sary, in our opinion, to let the picture first do its workand at the end of, perhaps, a year or two years finally convict the man who himself was not resj^onsible for the ]iiclure, for, in the course of his ordinary business, the exhibitor had to pre- sent the picture or else deprive his patrons of the privilege of seeing as much in the way of amusement as his competitor across the street.