El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1920-11-27
OFFICIAL CENSORSHIP OF ANY KIND
is CONTRARY TO AMERICAN IDEAL s.

livery state has laws prohibiting the public exhibition Of
Il lewd obscene pictures. Such prohibition within
the exercise Of the police powers While administration OF
such laws often udiculousy at variance with any RATIONAL
code Of morasnot by of laty but BY reason Of
faHacsm hand and vuigaTity the other
stu questions the necessity Of reasonable reua
ohs Of this nature and lust enforcement the
decency. It must rest with jury at last in each
case to decide whether given exhibit is lewd and obscene
OF not.
But these laws are something quite different from
censorship provided by law to be exercised BY beard Of
Political appontees.
The idea Of an official censorship Of anything published
written shown spoken is ntolerable to Americans gen
orally and rightly This whether the word be used
the sense Of preventive or Of rpressive action taken
arbitrarily.
Similar laws to those which apply to exhibition Of ewd
OF obscene pictures apply to dramatic representations writ
ing speaking, and printing. The police power is invoked
ard applied for the general protection against what amounts
may amount to assault, and there is limit beyond
which It Is commonly not safe to 60, IN any public MANNER
without getting INTO trouble with court.
When such get before jury the jury becomes in
sense board Of repressve censorship but under sy
ten Of government and law have found better way
TO insure substantial justice in the long than to trust
the courts and the people represented IN ures So while
ver5cs Of jues and courts such cases often rdcu
lous and against either morals they apt
to en- On the side Of excessive restriction than excessive
license.
Not Expressive laws but enlightenment and education
and culture furnish the best social protection against what
may be called assaults against cacy" against the finer
feelings Of decent people, against good taste, rather than
assaults against morals public private Ignorance
innocence and morality Is not matter Of the senses
much as It is matter Of the motve-Of the heart.
Official censorship by boards Of political appointees has
not valid argument in its faT6r.
The police power is sufficient IN most to insure
protection Of the public against hcenous exhibitions
publications speeches in public places. Where the offence
properly b cassed as an offence against good taste
as IS apt to be the easel than offence
against public morals then the general public ought to be
left entirely free TO exercise its own censorship its own
way by refusing to buy what offered for sale refusing
TO 60 to hear what IS not pleasant to listen TO- refusing
attend moving picture shows where the ordinary eanons OF
good taste, Of deEcacy, Of decency, are violated.
Voluntary censorshps, more less organized are
numerous and active Public librarians decline to circulate
certain classes Of books trustees Of art galleries Eve no
vail space to certain classes Of pictures floor space to
certain outgfVngs Of the sculptor It IS easy enough to
say that what ofnds good taste not art; but it not
easy to define the Of good taste The tendency
is to avoid offence, IN administering such public institutions
as Libraries and art galleries. and the public soon makes its
wishes known If daring individual oYeIsteDs the marx
Dramatic representations, in this country have CEN
monty been without other control than that Of the box
Office which is to say the collective censorship Of group
N the community. The police have right to interfere if
Offence OFerteps certain bounds but the offence be one
against good taste those who feel themselves offended have
remedy N their Own hands, Namely to stay away
attempt to induce others to stay away Experence has
shown in that group which demands license
70 offend good taste is small to make theaer pay
IN other that private standards Of public morals are
low and that people willing to pay to be shocked
As to moving pictures, there voluntary censorship IN
operation organized and fairly efectual which most OF
ne pEoaHces willingly submit II their interest," SO
much because they dc wish to offend good taste uer
~ as because they have found experience that it doe
not pay N the long to degrade the standards OF the
movies The motive matters little IN this case the main
thing IS that the public exhibition in America Of led CT
obscene moving pictures is practically unknown
Ihat there are offences against good taste against deli
aeyl cannot De aeniea But political Boards Of censoTs
whether state municipal Weuld often Be guided BY rul-
Of outlook an6uhtihE to 65afssness Fhsf
tHan b eonsidIaons Of legitimate art OF Of pdrs morals
Official chs9EsHp Of moving pictures IS not merely IN
Necessary It Wsdd e 6utra sous 1t would bs sBf IF ks5
ing with the Ideals q freedom upoh which Americans