The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-01-25
GREAT ARE MOVIE CENsoRs.

GREAT ARE MOVIE CENSORS!
Surely the smudgy fingers of poll
tics are not responsible for the deci-
sion barring the presentation of The
Birth of the Nation in kansas.
There was no mere pandering to the
negro vote. was there? Such sugges-
tions would seem to be unworthy of
being mentioned in view of the right
eous pretensions of Kansas public au-
thority in all matters. Yet they are
heard on all sides by those in quest
of the real motive behind this ruling.
And certainly there was rather I'M
usual promptness and unanimity in
making it on the part of the several
gentlemen concerned in the admins
tration of the moving picture censor
ship law. Indeed. it is not going too
far. perhaps, to assert that the fate
of the showing of the picture in Kan
sas was prejudged; that the ban was
actually placed on it before any of the
state censors had an opportunity OF
viewing it. In fact. the talk was cur
rent in state house circles, if a formal
announcement were not made, that
permission would be denied the exhi-
only fair to assume that something
besides the merits or the dement's OF
the picture was involved in the deci-
sion. But politics of the stripe of ca
tering to the negro vote would be
silly premise on which to hang any
such decision, and especially in Kan
sas If there is one state in the
Union that is free from anything
which smacks of the race problem"
it is Kansas, and this Notwithstanding
its considerable colored population.
And the negroes of Kansas are too
intelligent and sensible to believe for
one instant that the showing of The
Birth of the Nation in this state could
possibly inspire any prejudice against
them. They have too much respect
for the good sense of the whites. AS
a matter of fact, the critics of The
Birth of the Nation on the negro ques-
ton score seem to lose sight of the i'm
portant fact that such parts of this
picture as are concerned with the ne
gro, pretend to show the conditions
and activities that existed fifty long
years ago, and not today. So If this
picture should foment prejudice
against the negro it would be preju-
dice solely directed against the negro
of half a century ago, the negro
who was dazed by the unaccustomed
freedom so suddenly thrust upon
him; the negro who was egged
on to lawlessness and exploited by
divers designing politicians of that
period, white men who had blacker
hearts than any negro yet to be born.
That negro is far from being the
negro of today What a pretty pickle
it would be to judge any man,
black OF white, by what some of his
ancestors may have done a half
century ago, and to heap oppro-
brium on him for their offenses
This proposition is puerile. And to
condemn The Birth of the Nation
because it might have a tendency to
stir up prejudice against the negroes
of today is nothing more than to in
suit the intelligence of the general
public of today. But, if you please,
the negro question is neatly sub
merged in the dictum against The
Birth of the Nation that was writes
by Mr.. Ross, the state superintendent
of education, and the apparent high
cockaIorum of the Kansas moving
picture censorship. He pronounces
The Birth of the Nation to be i'm
moral, too immoral to be exhibited in
Kansas Volumes have been written
about The Birth of the Nation, pro
and con; all kinds of criticism, favor
able to a degree and unfavorable, as
well, has been directed at it; but it
remained for public authority in Kan
sas to discover that it is immoral. This
is an original Kansas achievement, in
deed. and only another one that will
make Kansas again ridiculous in the
eyes of the country. Perhaps the
courts will come to the rescue of Kan
sans and give them the opportunity of
witnessing. if they so desire, what is
probably the most massively spectacu-
lar and thrilling moving picture that
ever will be produced. 1t is to be
! hoped so.