and of higher moral standard in every way than they were five years ago. I would remind you of the fact that this is a young industry. Pictures are immeasurably cleaner than the stage, which is condoned so much. I wish I might show you gentlemen of this committee a set of placards comparing the motion-picture advertising for each year of the past five years. That is a branch of the business to which I have given much personal attention. It would not need an enthusiast to show you how vastly they have improved, or how much higher in type they have become in the matter of illustration, wording, and coloring.

Gentlemen of this committee, I will say to you very earnestly that this voluntary testimony which I present to you is not idle verbiage. Our organization has a chapter in every State with a committee or city circle in every big city. We have had a national motion-picture bureau established for 12 years. Because of the far-reaching influence for good or evil in motion pictures, we have always had an eager interest in the betterment of film production. I want to say that it has been my privilege to serve as a director of that national motion-picture bureau. In the early years of our organization we tried to register our suggestions to the makers of the pictures by letters of protest against the things we found bad. Next we tried censorship, and in a few States we succeeded in having members of our organization elected or appointed to State censorship boards. We soon learned, however, the futility of this method. We found that those boards, with their members' untrained viewpoints and their inconsistent deletions, did not accomplish the object that we had hoped to accomplish.

Now we are working with the producers in a constructive effort to obtain national cooperation and backing for better pictures because the only logical way to improve the public conscience is to educate and train it. We are spreading the propaganda of selected children's matinees and the educational films; and, gentlemen, we are getting results.

66

I

Do you gentlemen of this committee realize what were the bestpaying pictures of 1925? The first on the list, the biggest money maker, the greatest attraction to the largest number of people, was "The Ten Commandments." The next greatest attraction was, North of 36," and here are the next seven most popular pictures. am going to ask you to listen to this list with great thoughtfulness, and compare it with the list submitted by the speaker who preceded me. Compare it with that list of films submitted by the preceding speaker. These films, as a matter of fact, are the ones that the American people really approve. First in popularity was the "Ten Commandments," and the next was "North of 36." Here are the other seven: "Charley's Aunt," "The Thundering Herd," "The Covered Wagon," "The Freshman," "Abraham Lincoln," "Sally," "Riders of the Purple Sage," "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," and the "Rainbow Trail."

I could go on and name 50 or 60 others of like quality that met the popular taste, not one of them having a salacious or ugly situation in it.

Gentlemen of the committee, does not this prove to you that America is capable of safeguarding its own morals and bringing a great industry up to its own true standards? While our people are

making pictures of this type-pictures without a lewd or suggestive situation in them-then their morals are in no need of legal safeguarding by a politically appointed commission in Washington.

I thank you.

Mr. ROBSION. Now, you join with Doctor Twombly in favoring high-class, patriotic, and moral pictures, of course?

Mrs. MCGOLDRICK. Certainly. We hope to have the highest standards.

Mr. ROBSION. You do not approve the objectionable pictures that he pointed out, I presume.

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. I certainly do not; but I do not consider that they are as much in the majority as they seem to think.

Mr. ROBSION. Your position is that you are opposed to Federal regulation?

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. Yes, sir; because I do not think it is possible to succeed in what it hopes to do.

Mr. ROBSION. Do you favor State regulation?

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. No, sir; I do not favor State regulation such as we have at this time, because I think it has absolutely failed. Mr. ROBSION. You represent a very distinguished group of people here. How did you ascertain their will in this matter, or their position on these bills?

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. We have a biennial convention, the last one having been held at Philadelphia a year ago in September. At that time we had representatives from every State, and I think we had probably 550 accredited delegates in attendance from various associations, and about 4,000 people attended the convention. We had resolutions passed by the convention unanimously in favor of the position that I state here to-day.

Mr. ROBSION. Let me ask one other question: I notice that a picture was produced by Lady Cathcart recently.

Mrs. KAHN. That was a play.

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. I am so glad you brought that up, because that is a splendid point for us. The motion-picture people declined to have anything to do with Lady Cathcart. That was taken up by the stage and books, and you will not find any of that vile stuff in motion pictures at all.

Mr. BLACK. Do you, or your committee, ever protest against any pictures, or make any protests to the boards?

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. Yes, sir; we have protested some through the Hays organization. I can tell. you that during the past year we have had four films changed absolutely, or four scenes in them changed. We have had their fullest cooperation and they have been 100 per cent fair with us, showing no bias at all. They are willing to cooperate, and are interested in any suggestions that we make to them.

Mr. ROBSION. Your statement indicates that they fully realize that this is one of the greatest agencies in the country for good or evil. Mrs. McGOLDRICK. There is no doubt about that.

Mr. HOLADAY. In what films did you cause changes to be made? Mrs. MCGOLDRICK. One had to do with some rather nude pictures along on the title of the play, or they were title figures, and that suggestion was immediately acted upon. One was in connection with the play, "Flaming Frontier." I was asked to see that before

1

it was released. The villain in that play, in one of the scenes, was in a burning room with the heroine, and that scene was very suggestive in its possibilities. When I came back, I wrote a littie note to the manager suggesting a change in that scene. I said that I thought it was one of the greatest pictures produced, and then I made a few suggestions in regard to what I thought needed to be changed. Within a week I was advised that the film had been held up until those changes were made, and they were made. Everything was held up because of those suggestions. Of course, I am not a professional, but just an amateur who is interested in good pictures.

Mr. HOLADAY. What were the other changes that you had made? I think you mentioned four.

Mrs. McGOLDRICK. I can not tell you at the moment what the other changes were, but I can give them to you if you would like to have them.

Canon CHASE. Mr. Chairman, in order that we may not lose his testimony, I would be glad if you would now hear Professor Schwartz, of Baltimore.

Mr. ROBSION. Very well; we will hear Doctor Schwartz now.

STATEMENT OF DR. CHARLES K. SCHWARTZ, HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY, JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, AND VICE PRESIDENT OF CITIZENS LEAGUE OF MARYLAND FOR BETTER MOTION PICTURES

Doctor SCHWARTZ. Mr. Chairman, I very greatly appreciate the honor of being permitted to address the committee on this subject of better and higher standards in moving pictures.

For a period of about 40 years, I have been intimately associated with boys and students, or ever since I have been a teacher. My knowledge of the youth in the institutions with which I have been connected, at least, I think has been intimate, and I fell profoundly concerned as to the welfare of the youth of this Nation. We raise many things in this country of great value and which we prize highly, but there is nothing that we raise that is comparable to the boys and girls that we are raising in our homes. We have various duties and responsibilities in numerous directions, but our supreme duty, after all, is that of protecting and safeguarding the youth of the Nation. If I did not believe that to be our chief duty and responsibility I would get out of the unprofitable profession of teaching, and engage in something else. It seems to me that this whole problem must be looked at from the standpoint of the relationship that we sustain to the youth of this country during their characterforming, adolescent stage.

When I heard the lady who preceded me speak, as she did, concerning the fact that the American people were able to regulate this matter for themselves, I wanted to call your attention to the reason why I believe that it is up to us to do it. The duty and responsibility are ours because the larger part of the attendance at these places is made up of people who are not able to determine for themselves, or to safely determine for themselves, what is good or what is bad.

I have spent a great deal of time in the mountainous regions of this country where the mining industries are located. I have spent

a great deal of time in the coal-mining regions, traveling far and near among all classes of people. I spend several months each year in that way, and in the course of my travels I am often permitted to spend a great deal of time in the smaller towns. In those smaller towns I have always found the movie theaters crowded with children, and young children from 6, 8, 10 to 12 years of age. You do not notice that condition so much in the large cities as in the country towns. The movie theaters in the country towns are usually crowded with small children. These small children sit in those crowded theaters and witness scenes in which murders are committed, or in which adultery is committed. I have seen small girls and boys, 6 and 8 years of age, witnessing such performances. I care not what anyone says about what is going on in the movies; I know that what I am saying is correct, and you gentlemen know it. If you go to those places, you know that what I am saying is true. That is especially true of the smaller communities.

I grant you that in the large cities they take special pains to put on a better class of pictures, but, at the same time, you must remember that the great bulk of the people live in these smaller towns and places. I have seen those things, and know whereof I speak. When I think of my own young boyhood days, spending my time way out in the country, in the fields, among the flowers, trees, birds, and things that I was intensely interested in, it saddens me to think of these little children of the towns and cities who spend hours at night in stuffy rooms looking at scenes depicting all manner of crimes.

There are three ways in which we can decide what can be done with respect to moving pictures. In the first place, we could put the decision in the hands of the observers of the pictures; in the next place, we could have the decision placed in the hands of the producers of the pictures, and let them determine their quality; or we can put it up to a court of law. You may leave the decision of what is to be exhibited in the hands of the observer, or you can let the observer pass judgment on them; you can have it so that the producer may pass judgment upon them, or the court, an official body, may pass judgment. You gentlemen know, and I know, that there is no other way in which it can be done. Let us look at the situation and see if the observer is the proper one to do it. In other words, is it safe to say that a child of 8, 10, or 15 years of age is able to pass judgment on the desirability or propriety of the thing that they see?

In the institution with which I am connected we have many men who are well advanced, but even among our advanced students we do not permit them to determine the course of study. We have some undergraduates there, and we would never dream of having them pass judgment upon the coarse of study without our advice and counsel. You would not dream of sending your children to school and letting them pass judgment on what they should be taught. Children of tender years can not be permitted to pass judgment on what is best for them to see, and have them to wait until the picture can be reconstructed to their taste. It can not be done. Then, you are asked to permit the producer to pass judgment upon the pictures that are to be exhibited. Now, I want to say that I returned last

month from a trip that I made with many students from the University. I know these students intimately. I have lived with them, slept with them, taken meals with them; we have traveled together, talked together, and walked together, and I think I know them thoroughly. It was just this last month that we went in to see one of those things, and I got up in protest and came away. It was not wholesome. It is evident that the producer can not be trusted to pass judgment on these pictures so as to protect the youth of the country. It ought to be done by an experienced official committee or board, and I think you all feel as I do about that. I am so confident that you feel as I do about protecting the young people of this country that I will not stop to argue it. I would not come here today if I did not believe that. You have children in your own homes and you must safeguard and protect the youth of the nation against these dangers. We owe that to them as a supreme duty.

I have just heard this lady explain how splendid the whole thing was, but it is not that way everywhere. You know and I know that it is not. I have seen the other side of it, and she knows that it is so. But granting all that is claimed on behalf of the producers, granted that they are all pure-minded, then there can be no objection to a censorship or a judgment which forbids only the evil and foul. they are foul they will suffer, but if they are clean they will not suffer.

I thank you very much for your attention.

Mr. FENN. You made the statement-and I think it is absolutely correct that the attendance of these children upon those performances, if you could term them such, in close, crowded rooms, was inimical to their health. You think it would be better for them to be out of doors.

Doctor SCHWARTZ. Absolutely; I believe that it would be better for their moral, mental, and physical health.

Mr. FENN. In some States, I believe, there is a limit upon the age at which children can attend those performances unless accompanied by their parents.

Doctor SCHWARTZ. I have seen children from 6 to 10 years of age, thronging illy lighted and badly ventilated moving-picture theaters.

Mr. FENN. I was wondering just how a censorship could prevent that, unless the States passed laws forbidding the attendance of children at these theaters when they were below a certain age.

Doctor SCHWARTZ. If I were permitted to answer, I would say that I do not think that any State can successfully in the long run preven the attendance of young persons at these theaters. I do not think it is possible.

Mr. FENN. I would be glad to see a less frequent attendance by children, but still I think they are so delightful and instructive that I would like to see children enjoy proper pictures under proper conditions.

Mr. ROBSION. Of course, children are going to see them, and you want to have them see proper pictures.

Mr. FENN. Yes.

Mr. UPSHAW. Mr. Chairman, let me say that it is a rather striking anomaly that I should take the part of introducing at this time Mrs.