The Washington times., 1916-01-14
Opponents Appearing Before
House Committee Against
Hughes Bill for Board.
CALLED MODE OF EXPRESSION
Declared Censorship Would Vio-
late Right Of Free Speech
and Tie Up Industry.

Whether Uncle Sam shall put his o.
K. on the movies" is the issue now
before the House Committee on Edu-
cation, which will continue its hear
ings tonight on the Hughes bill for a
Federal board of censorship to pass
upon every foot of film shown within
the United States.
The hearings began at the Capitol
last night, and many representatives
OF reform organizations and the NOV
ing picture industry were present.
The reform forces were led by the
Rev. Wilbur Crafts. of this city, who
declared Federal censorship is neces-
snry to prohibit the exhibition OF
risque pictures.
]. w. Binder, of New York, secretary
of the motion picture board Of trade.
and other spokesman for film produ-
GERS, told the committee that the ex-
listing method of censorship by state
board and municipal authorities, in
conjunction with that maintained by
the industry itself, meets all require
ments.
FOresees Industry Tiled Up"
Mr.. Binder predicted that the indus
try will be tiled up" by a Federal in
spection aystem, which must pass on
some ten million feet of film per
week. that great harm will come to
the industry. and some concerns will
be forced to go out of business.
The Hughes bill would prevent the
exhibition of any picture in the Unit
ed States without the o. X. of the
Federal Government. Its mandates
would be made effective by refusing
copyright and interstate commerce
privileges to Objectionable films.
The hearings on the bill Will continue
from night to night for the next week
and additional time will be given for
the filing of briefs. Report of the bill
by the House committee is expected as
similar measure was reported last
session. but the reception of SUCH a
proposal in the House and the Senate
is problematical.
Mr.. Binder argued that there is no
more reason for Federal censorship OF
the moving picture than there is Tor
a Federal board to censor speeches.
Modes of Expression.
There are several modes of express
sion" he said; "one is speech. another
is printing. A third is the presentation
of news facts or stories on film. All
men may use the first two i'm unlimited
manner, with due regard to certain
responsibilities. II they disregard these
responsibilities they are punished. No
one attempts to censor speech or 10
censGr everything that is printed. Why
should a third method of expression.
which did not happen to be invented
when the Constitution was adopted, be
subjected to governmental censorship"
Mr.. Binder said the bill would pro-
hibit the showing of a film made pre-
vious to the Enactment of the law be-
cause it provided that all films shown
must be censored in advance. He
asserted that delays in Censoring
would tie up millions of capital, that
over ten million feet per week of
new film must he passed upon, and
that under the bill as drawn there
could he no film imported from other
countries. The censoring of one scene
he argued. would tie up an entire
play and no one board could possibly
do all the work necessary to pass
properly upon tho millions OF feet of
film made weekly in this country.
Other opponents of the legislation
present included Paul Cromelin, ]. II.
Freuhler. =. y. Powers. Chester Bee
croft, William A. Johnston, and Will
liam \. Seabury, all connected with
the producing companies >of New
York.