The Monroe journal., 1921-05-20

scene taai j. Improperly. dIbasingly
( suggestive.
We know OF no better way If vo,,
are " a theatre when such 4 scene is
shoNn, than 10 register your disap-
pro'al by leaving the house al once
ana Informing the MANAGEMENT why
you did 50. Such action could be- re-
ported 10 the film producers with
telling effect.
One OF the main objects Of the Tn
ION ministers was TO answer the very
question the Lancaster News has ris-
en- 10 ask. The ministers believed
thert We're large number of citi-
zenS Who did not wish improper pict-
nres. aud they were calling upon
those citizens 10 use their influence
IN diseourasing such exhibitions and
We're suggesting how that influence
could be used. The ministers. in
common with many others. were con
Nlnced that public sentiment is the
most mighty force OF every reform
especially in land like ours. where
the sovereignty OF the nation resides
IN the people. The ministers had MOI
SO Tar lost faith in humanity as To
Tear that there were not enough
right-thinking. God loving and SO
mah-ioNing people to use with results
the power that is in them TO leaven
the lump OF the motion picture abuse.
Ihey called on the people TO put that
power into action and suggested the
method, since censorship seemed TO
have failed.
Judging from its comment. the
Lancaster News does not seem TO IA
vor censorship. II writes:
The views of this paper on the
question OF censoring moving pict-
lres is well known. We have never
favored state censorship or any other
censorship so wholly impracticable.
But we have stated on several occa-
slons that. let alone. the producers
u moving pictures are going to kill
heir own industry"
II closes with the following para
yraph.
There are some southern towns
which have established boards OF
censorship We don't believe these
Will ever avail anything and they !
ire wholly impossible in the bring
ng about of the results desired. The ;
letter way is for the producers to
lean up their own screens: this they ;
ave promised TO do. If let alone. but
is doubtful ii they will However, +,
ne place TO censor moving pictures is {
| the source. at the place and at !
he time of production. A moving I
icture censored locally. may render
he whole picture impossible of show s
ng, while II censored in the making, r
My that part which is Objectionable I
Tould be omitted" a
II may be that II let alone the pro- 3
ucers OF moving pictures are going ,
D Kill their own industry. But do we c
amt TO see the moving picture indus b
ry, with its unbounded power for S
plift an education and recreation, 7
angling and strangling like Haman
n its own gallows? o
The very thing that the Lancaster I
ews refers to in its closing clause. !
! quoted above. is what the minis I
ers OF Union were trying to bring q
bout, namely censorship by the pro- v
lcers In the making, when only the [;
parts could be removed.
he ministers thought the surest way s.
get the producers to do that would o
: for the right-thinking people to S;
I the producers know through the h
cal theatre managers what kind of S
ctures the truest public sentiment Il
d not want. is
Truly as the Lancaster News well b
US. the place TO censor moving pict- o.
'es is at the source. The ministers B
the Union county association real bi
ed that. and they appealed TO the Il
'ople to do their part TO get that tc
ny thing done. cl