OCR Text |
Show -f . i f Home and School League f r : V CENSORSHIP OF MOVING PICTURES. Explanatory The league is opposed to censorship of moving pictures as proposed pro-posed by Mr. Chez in his senate bill "o. S. It was therefore thought best to state its position iu this week's column, col-umn, thereby postponing until next week the articles promised on vocational vocation-al guidance. Concerning senate bill No. S, by Joseph Chez, entitled "An act regulating regu-lating the exhibition of moviog picture pic-ture films and reels, creating a board of censors, and providing penalties for violations thereof," the Home and School league of Salt Lake City has. among other objects, that ''to provide opportunities conducive to child development, devel-opment, physical, intellectual and moral." mor-al." The league would preface its objections ob-jections by stating that it is in sympathy sym-pathy with the ultimate aim which the bill seeks to accomplish, but feels that much of the methods aud mauy of the provisions tend to defeat the real purpose pur-pose behind it all. Tu pursuance of the foregoing object, the league begs to submit the following argument against the above entitled bill: (a) Each week about 150 films enter Salt Lake City. It is a physical impossibility im-possibility for one official, acting as censor, to even attempt to pass on those pictures. Any censorship worthy of the name requires an intelligent examination ex-amination of each film. In order to do this a corps of assistants would seem to be necessarv. This would mean the placing of the actual censoring -in the hands of persons who would, in effect, occupy minor political positions, and as such could not be expected to have training, interest or sense of responsibility responsi-bility required for this important task. (b) The bill provides that the cost of censorship is to be met by a charge of $2 per reel for each reel censored. This would place an unwarranted hard-fhip hard-fhip on all the small picture houses, whose contributions to the 'entertainment 'entertain-ment of their communities is most valuable, val-uable, and it would in many cases result re-sult in the loss of a perfectly legitimate source of amusement. (c) It is unfair to the public to place the matter of their amusement in the hands of a number of paid helpers whose ability would surely be limited by the moderate salary paid and the usual methods of selecting political appointees. ap-pointees. (d) This bill as originally introduced was copied after a bill passed in Kansas. Kan-sas. No statements are forthcoming indicating in-dicating that the Kansas bill is satis- 1 factory to either public or producers. There'is nothing to show that changes from the Kansas'bill to the present form do away with objections to the Kansas bill. (o) Computed on the basis of the present number of films entering Salt Lake City each week, the gross revenue secured would not cover the expense of the work. This conclusion is based on the annual cost to the national board of review of motion pictures, and not allowing for the fact that the members mem-bers of the hoard volunteer their services. ser-vices. (f) This bill, by Ignoring what is already al-ready being accomplished bv the national na-tional board of review, in effect tears down much useful and constructive work already accomplished aid tends to create an atmosphere of antagonism between be-tween producers and the proposed constituted con-stituted representatives of the public. (g) The bill does not recognize the many producers who are not only willing will-ing 'but anxious to better the standard of films, but places these on the same footing with the unscrupulous whose films could be censored and their production pro-duction 6topped by invoking laws already al-ready on our statute books Jawi which need only the intelligent support of public opinion to make them very effective ef-fective m accomplishing much which this bill seeks to bring about. (h) Tn conclusion: Censorship as here attempted is un-American, a relic of the middle ages, a step backward. In somewhat the same form as this it has been tried in other states and their laws changed and amended cm account I of their unsatisfactory working. Nothing Noth-ing is brought forward to show that the proposed bill embodies any of the beueficial experieuces of the other state. Mavor Gaynor, in vetoing the censorship censor-ship ordinance in New York City, justified jus-tified in part his action as follows: It has hitherto been the understanding under-standing in this country that no censorship con be established by law to decide in advance what may or may not be lawfully printed or published. Ours is a government of free speech and of free press. That is the cornerstone of free government. govern-ment. In our fundamental instruments of government in this country, which we call constitutions, we expressly ex-pressly guaranteed from the beginning begin-ning free speech and a free press, and prohibited the passing of any law abridging the same. So universal has been the opinion opin-ion that these constitutional provisions pro-visions abolished all censorships of the pres. and forbade them in the future that I have liefii able to find only one attempt in this country to set 'up such a censorship before this i one of yours. Our constitutional j provision" plainly is that p-iblica- tions. whether oral or priuted, or ; bv writing or lv pictures. b:ili not j be restrained in advance, but that j everyone shall be free to speak or publish what he sees fit, subject to being prosecuted afterwards for libel, immorality, obsceuity or indecency inde-cency therefor." If this ordinance be legal, then a similar ordinance in respect of the newspapers and the theaters generally gener-ally would be legal. Are you of opinion that you have any such power as that?" If o. you should probably begin with the newspapers and the so-called high-class theaters. thea-ters. Once revive the eeusorsiiip and there is no telling how far c may carry it. These moving picture shows are attended Ivy the great bulk of the people, many of whom cannot afford to pay the prices charged by the theater. They nre ft solace and an education to them. TVhy are we singling out these people peo-ple as subjects necessary to he protected pro-tected by a censorship? Arc thev any more in need of protection by censorship than the rest of the community com-munity 1 ANNOUNCEMENTS. The Bonneville Parent-Teacher association asso-ciation will hold its next meeting at the Bonneville school Friday, February 23. at 3:30 p. m. Sam Browu will speak oo "The Life of Washington,'' a. piano solo will be. rendered by Walter Helock; a recitation will be given by Morcll Druce, entitled "I am Washington." Refreshments will be served. . The Douglas Parent-Teacher association associa-tion will meet at the Douglas school Tuesday. February 20, at M:40 p. m. The principal address will be given by P. ,1. Sanders ou -'Strict Economy for 1017." The Grant Parent-Teacher, association will meet at the Grant school Friday, February 2.1. at ?,:Z0 p. m. Principal YV. D. Prosser will speak on ''The Public Library as an Aid to School Work." N The Lowell Fareut-Teacher associa- S tion will hold its next regular meeting ; at the Lowell school Monday, February ; 19, at 8 p. m. Dr. Ernest A' Smith will deliver an address. Supervisor Hugh W. Dougall will render a solo, and a special musical programme will be given bv pupils of the school. : The Whittier Parent-Teacher association associa-tion will meet at the Whittior school Wednesday, February 21, at 8 p. m. Assistant As-sistant Superintendent G. N. Child will deliver the address of the evening and a splendid musical programme will be rendered, including several numbers by pupils of the school. The two-feature film of the boys' and girls' matinee to be given Saturday, February 24, at 10:15 a. m. at the Paramount-Empress theater, will be Babv Early in "The Shepherd" and "Gref-chen." "Gref-chen." These two fairy stories will constitute a splendid double bill. |