the motivations of a censor
TRANSCRIPT
1 | P a g e
The Motivations of a Censor: A Study of Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer and The Effects of his Times on the
Pennsylvania Board of Censor (Motion Pictures)
Gerald G. Huesken Jr. HIST 610: Seminar in United States History
Dr. Ronald Frankum August 25, 2012
Figure 1: The Board's Official Seal of Approval, cir 1917 (Pennsylvania State Archives, Harrisburg)
2 | P a g e
Introduction -‐ Critiquing Richard C. Saylor and his Work on the Pennsylvania Board of Censor and Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer: When looking back over the history of the
United States, no topic has spawned more controversy
than the issue of censorship and when (or if)
government-‐sponsored suppression of information is
appropriate, especially in times of perceived national
crisis. Regardless of the time period, there have always
been those who believed they were acting in the best
interest of society (the "censor") and those who
believed that any suppression was an infringement on
their rights as an American citizen. It is within this vain
of historical scholarship that Pennsylvania archivist
Richard C. Saylor produced an article on the history of
the Pennsylvania Board of Censor for motion pictures for a 2004 edition of the academic journal, Film
History. While looking to present an "interesting case study of government-‐legislated censorship
boards", Mr. Saylor also attempted to show the reader some insight into the motivating factors of one
of the board's earliest and most influential leaders, Pennsylvania historian Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer.1
Well-‐respected in his time as the biographer of prominent American historical figures such as
Abraham Lincoln and Henry Clay as well as the creator of an early seminal work of American historical
scholarship (the multi-‐volume A History of the United States since the Civil War), Oberholtzer served
on the Board of Censor from 1915 until his dismissal in 1920. Throughout this period, Oberholtzer,
according to Saylor, would become not just a force for movie censorship in the state of Pennsylvania,
1 Saylor, Richard C. "Dr. Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer and the Early Years of the Pennsylvania State Board of Censors (Motion Picture)." Film History: An International Journal 16.2 (2004): 142. Print.
Figure 2: Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer cir. 1936 (Temple University Archives, Philadelphia)
3 | P a g e
but an advocate and spokesperson for the practice nationwide as well as a campaigner for more Federal
control over the motion picture industry.2 It is with this in mind, that Saylor tried to provide a rational
means to explain Oberholtzer's motivations for accepting such a calling.
To Saylor, the answer lies in Oberholtzer's desire to "save Americans from themselves" and
argues that Oberholtzer believed he was performing a vital service justified by "a moral obligation to
eliminate salacious material from films before the masses were subject to its negative influence", an
obligation that had to be done objectively and without the influence of partisan politics or pressure for
motion picture industry. 3 In Saylor approximation, Oberholtzer was driven by these moral convictions of
public service and his passion for the betterment of American society.4 When looking at the historical
record of Oberholtzer, who carefully crafted his historical image for posterity with the publication of
numerous articles, speeches, and even a full-‐length book (1922's The Morals of the Movie), it is easy to
see what Saylor sees -‐ a patriotic American citizen concerned with the direction of his country and
betterment of his fellow citizens. "I am no friend of the censor...or for the matter...any name or political
order which suggests government control," wrote Oberholtzer in the preface to The Morals of the
Movie, "Indeed I am an individualist who would dwell...in complete freedom [ if possible]."5 While it is
safe to assume, as Saylor has, that Oberholtzer truly saw himself as a champion for public good during
an era of Progressive-‐minded reform, the reality of the situation is that human beings are not
completely ignorant of other competing factors, specifically one's class, politics, or survival.
In looking at the primary and secondary sources available both at the Pennsylvania State
Archives in Harrisburg and Oberholtzer's surviving personal papers at the Historical Society of
Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, a different picture of Pennsylvania's famed motion picture watchdog starts
2 Saylor, Richard C. "Dr. Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer and the Early Years of the Pennsylvania State Board of Censors (Motion Picture)." Film History: An International Journal 16.2 (2004): 145-153. Print. 3 Saylor 159, 146 4 Saylor, Richard C. "Dr. Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer and the Early Years of the Pennsylvania State Board of Censors (Motion Picture)." Film History: An International Journal 16.2 (2004): 146-150. Print. 5 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Preface. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 6. Print.
4 | P a g e
to emerge. While Oberholtzer may have prided himself as politically impartial and morally objective, the
evidence speak to a man driven by relatively common class fears and social norms. It is without
argument that Oberholtzer obviously fit into the upper class of American society, a noted and wealthy
intellectual who was not immune to the concerns of others like him. When looking at the historical
evidence through this lens, Saylor's image of the morally-‐upright and objective Oberholtzer lessens and
a new image emerges of a man with a growing nativist fear of the influence of motion pictures over the
immigrant and working classes, anxious over a preserved breakdown of law and order due to depiction
of law enforcement officials in the movies, intolerant of the evolving female gender roles due to the
influence of movies, and far from politically objective when conducting the business of the state.
5 | P a g e
Part I -‐ Background to the Pennsylvania Board of Censor and Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer:
The history behind the Pennsylvania motion picture
Board of Censor is one that is born out of the Progressive era
reforms of the early Twentieth Century. The bill, P.L 1067, calling
for the creation of a state 'Board of Censor' for the overseeing of
motion pictures, was adopted in the spring of 1911, with both
houses of the Pennsylvania General Assembly voting in
unanimous support.6 When the bill was eventually signed into
law by Governor John Kinley Tener, Pennsylvania became the
first state in the Union to have a legislatively created board of
censor for the purpose of viewing and editing motion pictures.7
The originally reading of the new law provided for the governor
to nominate two censors (one male and one female) for a period of three years to review all films
intended to be shown in Pennsylvania and authorized the Board "to approve such [films] as shall be
moral, and to withhold approval from such as shall tend to debase or corrupt the morals" of the state's
citizenry.8
6 United States. Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Part IV. Harrisburg: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1912.3905-06. Print. 7 Jowett, Garth. Film: The Democratic Art. Boston: Little, Brown, 1976. 118. Print. 8 Herman P. Miller.Smull's Legislative Hand Book and Manual of the State of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: C.E. Aughinbaugh, 1912. 122. Print
Figure 3: Republican Pennsylvania governor John Kinley Tener, who signed P.L. 1067,
creating the Pennsylvania Board of Censor, into law, cir. 1910 (Pennsylvania State
Archives, Harrisburg)
6 | P a g e
In 1915, the Board of Censor's place as a permanent
fixture in Pennsylvania would be legitimized by the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court and its ruling in the case of Buffalo Branch v.
Breiting. In their final opinion, the justices "expressed...that the
promotion of public morals was a chief function of government
" and that the " statute creating a [B]oard of [C]ensors was
clearly an exercise of the police power of the state..."9 The legal
protection provided to the Board of Censor was further
strengthened at the Federal level when the US Supreme Court
ruled favorably in the case of Mutual Film Corporation v.
Industrial Commission of Ohio later that year. Film distributer
Mutual Film Corporation had brought suit against the state of
Ohio, claiming that the state's censorship law violate their First Amendment rights and interfered with
interstate commerce.10 Despite these arguments, the Court ruled unanimously against the Mutual Film
Corporation, citing that "[the Court could not] regard [the censorship of movies] as beyond the power of
government."11 Emboldened by these judicial decisions, the Pennsylvania General Assembly amended
P.L. 1067 in May of 1915, allowing the governor to appoint a second male member to the Pennsylvania
Board of Censor and allowed for an increase in state funding and staffing for the Board's day-‐to-‐day
operations.12 The Board would remain a part of the Pennsylvania political landscape until 1956.
It was during this period of expanding influence for the Board that Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer
arrived on the scene. Born in Chester County in 1868, Oberholtzer was the son of a former school
9 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 116. Print. 10 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 167-68. Print. 11 Aronson 168. 12 United States. Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Part III. Harrisburg: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1916. 3205. Print.
Figure 4: Pennsylvania governor, Martin Brumbaugh, who appointed Oberholtzer
to the Board of Censor, cir. 1922 (Pennsylvania State Archives, Harrisburg)
7 | P a g e
teacher, John Oberholtzer, and a socially conscious mother, Sara Louisa Vickers Oberholtzer, who was
well-‐known as an abolitionist, poet, and spokeswoman for female suffrage. Educated at the University of
Pennsylvania and later at European universities in Paris and Berlin, Oberholtzer found his true calling as
a writer. From 1889 until 1908, he worked for a variety of popular Philadelphia newspapers as an editor
and later branched out into the field of historical study, editing the popular American Crisis Biographies
series as well as organizing a number of historical pageant parades for the city of Philadelphia.13 In 1915,
Oberholtzer was gaining a new reputation as an accomplished biographer and respected teacher when
he was nominated by Governor Martin Brumbaugh to be the newest member of the Pennsylvania Board
of Censor.14 "I knew little indeed about the motion picture," admitted Oberholtzer, "... I had only a dim
knowledge of what lay in the dramatic shadow-‐land to which [Governor Brumbaugh had] invited me.
But I said that his tender of the office pleased me, and I was soon in my place."15
13 Glassberg, David. American Historical Pageantry: The Uses of Tradition in the Early Twentieth Century. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1990. 46-52. Print. 14 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 172. Print. 15 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Preface. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 6-7. Print.
8 | P a g e
Part II -‐ Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer: Champion of the Nativist Upper Class-‐
"Stories, or scenes, holding up to ridicule and reproach…classes, or other social groups...will be disapproved."
-‐ Section 9, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor16 "Themes or incidents in pictures stores, which are designed to inflame the mind[s]...or to establish false standards...under the...classes...will be disapproved." -‐ Section 23, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor17 The social conditions on the early Twentieth
Century in the United States were times of great
economic and social change for the nation. The
introduction of the Industrial Revolution to the United
States had produced great wonders of manufacturing
and technology, but had also spawned a growing
demand for labor. From 1836 to 1914, over thirty
million Europeans migrated to the United States,
hoping to fill that demand and start a new life in a new
country.18 These immigrants brought new customs,
language, and political ideals that were foreign to most native-‐born Americans and helped to foster a
deep seeded xenophobic fear not just among working class Americans (who looked upon these
newcomers as competition for their jobs), but especially among upper class Americans, who feared
social and political instability. Once released into American society, many of these new immigrant
citizens had little working knowledge of the English language and lacked the proper connections to find
good employment. Living in horrid conditions in the slums of many American cities, these naturalized
16 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Preface. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 213. Print. 17 Oberholtzer 213 18 Evans, Nicholas J. "Work in Progress: Indirect Passage from Europe Transmigration via the UK, 1836–1914." Journal for Maritime Research 3.1 (2001): 70-84. Print.
Figure 5: An anti-‐immigrant cartoon, published in 1898 (The Library of Congress, Washington DC)
9 | P a g e
American families would work whatever jobs would come their way and looked for new ways to provide
an escape from the misery of their daily existence. The early motion picture industry provided just such
an escape.
As frequent guests of the movie house, not
just in Pennsylvania, but across the United States,
immigrant workers found that regular movie
showings fit seamlessly into their work day, often
over lunch breaks or at the end of working hours.19
Immigrants were also drawn to the movies because
they required little working knowledge of English.
"The Russian Jews, the Germans, the Austrians, who
[have] not been in this country for a week and does
not understand English...goes to the motion picture
theatre because what he sees on the screen is very real to him, and he understands as well as the
Americans," explains one Socialist daily from the period.20 Movie theaters also provided a nature
socialization ground for not just immigrants, but for all working class Americans. Barriers of ethnic
isolation, created by the segregation of city neighborhoods, were non-‐existent at the movie houses,
where people could mingle freely.21 Despite the obvious positive effect, some conservative upper-‐class
leaders were fearful that the film industry could use its influence to unite the diverse ethnic workers as
never before. To them, movie houses were becoming less about leisure and more about politics, serving
as centers for immigrants were people could exchange news, discuss politics, vote, or present radical
19 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 20. Print. 20 Aronson 21 21 Aronson 21
Figure 6: An example of a typical immigrant family to the United States during the turn of the Twentieth Century,
cir. 1915 (The Library of Congress, Washington DC)
10 | P a g e
ideas.22 The films that were being shown touched on issues that could "inflame the passions" of the
working class' anger towards the upper classes.23 By the 1910's, upper class America had become
increasingly concerned with the growing popularity of movies as an instrument of political and social
speech. They saw this social unrest not in the inequality of American society, but in the growing
influence of foreign political ideas such as Socialism and the turning of the motion picture from a
harmless enjoyment to a vehicle of social anarchy.24 As film historian, author, and professor of graduate
studies at University College in London, Dr. Lee Grieveson, pointed out in his book, Policing Cinema:
Movies and Censorship in Early Twentieth Century America, "censorship [was] born out of the social
anxiety of the urban and industrial society."25 It would be this issue of limiting the influence of pro-‐
immigration and working class themes in the movies that would drive the decisions of censorship
advocates like Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer.
While the records of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor are incomplete, there are tantalizing
clues to the growing nativist pressure of the upper class and the issues of labor and immigration on the
work of the Board which Saylor has overlooked.26 The Board's public report to Governor Brumbough for
1915, bears out the influence that movies are having on the state's immigrant class, directing the
governor's attention to the "fearful...social implications of film" and their ability to cause a "mania with
many classes."27 "...A few of [the] ills and misfortunes [of the motion picture] spring from a lack of
homogeneity in the population of the modern state," wrote Oberholtzer in an article for International
22 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 26. Print. 23 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 26-27. Print. 24 Ross, Steven Joseph. Working-Class Hollywood: Silent Film and the Shaping of Class in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1998. 29. Print. 25 Grieveson, Lee. Policing Cinema: Movies and Censorship in Early-Twentieth-Century America. Berkeley: University of California, 2004. 156. Print 26 It is important to note that the Pennsylvania Board of Censor accumulated a large mass of records during it lifetime, but in 1958 many of these records were approved for destruction by the state. The remaining examples have been the property of the Pennsylvania State Archives since 1970. 27 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Report of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor, June - December, 1915. By J. L. Breitinger, E. C. Niver, and Ellis P. Oberholtzer. Harrisburg: WM. Stanley Ray, 1915. 33-34. Print.
11 | P a g e
Quarterly, "It is a grouping of diverse and discordant elements which work at cross purposes with each
other."28 From day one, Oberholtzer believed that immigrants were the perfect target of movie
producers, who wished to use their influence over this particular group of people to further their own
agenda.29 Specifically, Oberholtzer pointed to the popularity of melodramas and violent action /
adventure films known as "crime serials". "The crime serials [are] meant for ignorant classes of the
population with the grossest tastes," cited Oberholtzer, "[These pictures flourish] in the picture halls in
the mill villages and in the thickly settled tenement houses and low foreign-‐speaking neighborhoods."30
Though not specifically airing his nativism publicly, it is not a stretch of the imagination to see that
Oberholtzer is a firm supporter of the American upper class and their anti-‐immigrant sentiments.
Another batch of evidence to this end can also be found in the types of films that the Board of
Censor opted to review during Oberholtzer's term. In July of 1916, a film entitled The Mexican Slides
was submitted to the Board for approval. Described simplistically as an "action / adventure story set in
Mexico", the Board ordered numerous deletions from the film including deletions of a scene depicting
"soldier's graves" and the "hanging of local bandits".31 While not much explanation is given in the
official record to the context of these deletions, one who looks at the historical timeline might note that
1916 fell within the time period of General John J. Pershing's Punitive Expedition into Mexico. While it is
unknown if Mexican nationals were numerous in Pennsylvania at this time, the Board obviously did not
want to give the immigrant population of their state any sympathy for foreign fighters like Poncho Villa.
Another film that raises some question as to the motives of the Board's censorship procedures was the
1915 film The Nigger. Other than its obviously racist title (which the Board ordered changed), the film
28 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. "Home Rule for Our American Cities." International Quarterly 6.75 (1903): 403. Print. 29 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Preface. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 98-99. Print. 30 Singer, Ben. "Early Film Melodramas." Action and Adventure Cinema. Ed. Yvonne Tasker. New York City: Routledge, 2004. 58. Print. 31 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22.
12 | P a g e
was required to make numerous deletions including scenes depicting "mob violence".32 Perhaps the
Board did not want movie audiences taking their cues from what they saw on the screen. In May of
1918, the Board banned a film entitled The Heart of Humanity, which was characterized as a popular
"Jewish drama" relating to the First World War that had been produced by the famed American director
D.W. Griffith. While, again, the Board's records are incomplete as to why this film was banned, it is
worth noting that the film’s portrayal of Germans (who maintained a large viewing audience in
Pennsylvania) was considered very negative for the time.33
Perhaps the most obvious examples of the Board's anti-‐labor, anti-‐immigration sentiment can
be found in the duel 1917 films of The Tiger Woman and A Sleeping Memory. Originally submitted for
review in May of that year, The Tiger Woman told the story of Russian debutant who kills her numerous
husbands for their fortunes as she makes her way across Europe and, eventually, to the United States.
Billed as a "crime serial", the Board refused to grant their approval to the film's producers, who then
took the Board to court, but eventually
lost before the Pennsylvania Court of
Common Pleas.34 An argument could be
made that the Board refused to grant
release for The Tiger Woman out of fear
that such a negative portrayal of the
state's Slavic immigrants might insight
ethnic violence. In a similar vein, A
Sleeping Memory told the story of rich young women who is forced to turn working class after her father
32 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Elimination Sheets 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22 33 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Legal Briefs 1915-1940. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22 34 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Legal Briefs 1915-1940. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22
Figure 7: A handbill from the Regent Theatre in Albany, New York during the week of March 5th, 1917 promoting the film The Tiger
Woman and its star, Theda Bara. (The Historical Society of New York, New York City)
13 | P a g e
commits suicide. According to the Board's legal records, the woman is harassed throughout the film by
representatives of the working class for her wealthy upbringing until she turns to drug abuse to cope
with the social stigma.35 While one could maybe see audiences feeling sympathy for such a character,
the Board refused to grant their approval to the picture and, again, the producers of the film took them
to court. Predictably, the Board's decision was upheld after what was described as a "stirring attack" on
the morals of the picture by the Board's only female member and Oberholtzer’s main supporter on the
Board, Katherine Niver, who objected to the image being set of the young women in the film. In these
examples it’s easy to see that the Board of Censor objected to the ridicule of the upper classes by the
motion picture industry and promoted a nativist-‐flavored agenda that strong measures would be
needed to keep these fearful classes in check.
35 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Legal Briefs 1915-1940. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22
14 | P a g e
Part III -‐ Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer: The Law and Order Censor-‐
"Scenes showing the modus operandi of criminals, which are suggestive and incite to evil action, such as murder...robbery...[or] the lighting and throwing of bombs...will be disapproved." -‐ Section 5, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor36 "Views of incendiaries, burning, wrecking and the destruction of property, which many put like actions in the minds of those evil instincts, or may degrade the morals of the [people], will be disapproved." -‐ Section 23, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor37
Outside of his duties on the Board,
Oberholtzer grew to become a national figure for
motion picture censorship and someone that
upper class America could look to preserve law
and order among the working classes. In his 1922
publication, The Morals of the Movie,
Oberholtzer stated that film producers had an
obligation to the public to provide wholesome
subject matter for their films. "There is a
belief...that the picture producer is not living up to his responsibilities," wrote Oberholtzer,
"...Sometimes he is deliberately choosing bad subjects so that he can advertise this fact and entice
[audiences] into his theatres...to stir...curiosity about the seamy side of life..."38 Oberholtzer expanded
this point further in a published article, stating that "[t]heir film stories are often set in the under-‐world
[and] those who have evil instincts see all manner of crime, indeed the detailed illustrations of feasible
methods of committing it. Keepers are told by the inmates of reformatories and penitentiaries that they
36 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 213. Print. 37 Oberholtzer 214 38 Oberholtzer 16
Figure 8: Comedian Charlie Chaplin bashes a police officer in a scene from his 1916 movie, Police (The Library of Congress)
15 | P a g e
were prompted to wrong-‐doing by looking at motion pictures."39 While Oberholtzer returned to his
familiar targets of melodramas and serialized crime pictures to explain this point, he is also especially
critical of slap-‐stick comedies and the drug movie (or the "enlightenment films" as he claims some
producers call them) when it comes to these breakdowns in law and order.40
The comedy film were an especially guilty target, according to Oberholtzer, when considering
the work of the most famous comedian of his day, Charlie Chaplin, an immigrant Oberholtzer had
publicly called "the fool of American democracy".41 "He [Chaplin] set the pace for other movie
comedians," claimed Oberholtzer, "whose aim...have put an indelible trademark up American comedy
film."42 That trademark, alleged Oberholtzer, is the mark of lawless behavior and a complete disrespect
for the American forces of law and order, easily imitated by America’s working classes .43 The
"enlightenment films" were another major concern for Oberholtzer which popularization an
underground drugs culture with substances like opium, morphine, and cocaine being popularized and
justified by movie producers as "cautionary tales" complete with alleged scientific studies and police
testimony as backup.44
While these films gave rise to crime,
Oberholtzer also believed that these movies
portrayed the forces of law and order (such as
the police) in such a negative light that it would
cause a major lack of respect for public
discipline and a possible breakdown in the
American justice system. "It is clear that our
39 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. "What Are The "Movies" Making of Our Children?" The World's Work 41 (1920): 251. Print 40 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 40. Print. 41 Oberholtzer 73 42 Oberholtzer 73-74 43 Oberholtzer 74 44 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 54. Print.
Figure 9: The popular Keystone Kops from a lost short film, cir. 1915 (The Museum of Moving Image, New York)
16 | P a g e
ordinary police and constabulary authorities are unable to exercise a suitable care over the moving
picture house," wrote Oberholtzer, "Their [primary] duty is to preserve good order in the streets..."45
The popular Keystone Kops series of the 1910's and 1920's was another comedy series that gave
Oberholtzer fits for its negative portrayal of policemen.46 "The policeman and every other officer of the
law has been so much caricatured that by this time, they [are] beyond the bounds of…America's
respect," blasted Oberholtzer.47 Such disrespect of authority and instruction on crime, gave rise to even
more concern among upper class Americans about movies and their popularity among the immigrant
and working class populations.
When looking at the records of Pennsylvania Board of Censor, a number of films fit into this
category of wanting to preserve law and order. An examination sheet from the Board dated August,
1917 details requests to the producers of a movie entitled Charley's Picnic to delete scenes of characters
"fighting with police...” There is also a notation asking for the removal of a scene where a major
character "thumb[s] his nose" at an officer.48
Another legal brief dated December of 1915,
details the censoring of film entitled Sealed Lips,
which was based on a popular novel of the day The
Silence of Dean Maitland. In the novel and film
adaptation, a clergyman impregnates a young
woman and when the father of the girl finds out
about the pregnancy, he attacks the clergymen and
45 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. "The Censor and the Movie "Menace"" Ed. George Harvey. North American Review 212 (1920): 645. Print. 46 Arnesen, Eric. Encyclopedia of US Labor and Working-Class History. London: Routledge, 2006. 449. Print 47 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 76-77. Print. 48 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22.
Figure 10: A still from an Australian remake of Sealed Lips called The Silence of Dean Maitland from 1934 (The Museum
of Moving Image, New York)
17 | P a g e
is killed accidently in a fall. In the end, the clergyman's best friend gets the blame for the father's death
and goes to jail for twenty years while the clergymen lives a successful life. In the Board's unnamed legal
brief, Sealed Lips is characterized as a film "calculated to inspire contempt for the administration of
justice" while also calling for major deletions to the film, which the Court of Common Pleas eventually
obliged.49 In Oberholtzer's mind, the movie industry must support the social agenda of the traditional
American family to these new immigrant citizens, vales of the home, the school, and the church, when
considering their film topics and it is the job of the censor to make sure that happens. "He [the movie
producer] is not a teacher...or a moralist," wrote Oberholtzer, "...he is wanting in the most rudimentary
sense of social responsibility with reference to his fellow man."50 To Saylor, this is related to
Progressivism, however, an argument can be made to the class-‐based and nativist sentiments of the
time and a desire to preserve the status quo as it stood.
49 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Legal Briefs 1915-1940. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22 50 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 41. Print.
18 | P a g e
Part IV -‐ Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer: The Anti-‐Feminist? – "Pictures and part of pictures, dealing with abortion...will be disapproved. These will include themes and incidents having to do with..."birth control"...and similar subjects" -‐ Section 8, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor51 "Views of women...will not be disapproved as such, but when women are shown in suggestive positions or their manner...is suggestive or degrading, such scenes will be disapproved." -‐ Section 20, Standards of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor52 The act that created the Pennsylvania Board of was very specific in who would serve, gender-‐
wise, on this panel -‐ two men and one woman.53 While
Oberholtzer's personal papers offer little insight into his views on
women in general, historians have been left to wonder what
Oberholtzer's true thoughts on femininity were. Was he unduly
biased towards women's because of his own mother's background
in the suffrage movement? Did Oberholtzer's views of women
soften after working with a capable female censor, Mrs. Katherine
A. Niver, who he politically supported? Such questions are hard to
pinpoint for "Oberholtzer the man", but the views of women
presented by "Oberholtzer the censor" are very clear when put
into the context of his class status. In a publication he wrote early in his career entitled The New Man: A
Chronicle of Modern Times, Oberholtzer offers some possible insight into his feelings on women.
Created as a kind of modern-‐day version of Plato's Republic, Oberholtzer's characters engage in a
philosophical discussion of the role of women in modern American society. As one character phrases it,
while they are all members of a "great upper class" where men and women have equal access to
51 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Preface. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 213. Print. 52 Oberholtzer 215. 53 United States. Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Part III. Harrisburg: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1916. 3205. Print.
Figure 11: Sara Louisa Vickers Oberholtzer, mother of the famed censor, from 1898 (The
Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)
19 | P a g e
education and betterment, the "intellectual forces of women will show a lower average than the
intellectual force of men of the same class" in almost every instance. Thought women will continue to
advance in knowledge and status, they will never be equal to men, concludes Oberholtzer's characters.54
Is Oberholtzer underlying his writing with his own personal thoughts?
54 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The New Man: A Chronicle of the Modern Times. Philadelphia: Levytype, 1897. 450-59. Print.
20 | P a g e
In his 1922 publication, The Morals of the Movie, Oberholtzer gives little insight into his
thoughts of female actresses or directors, but he is very critical of the amount of sex being portrayed in
motion pictures and how it might affect the image of women overall in society. Calling these films "sex
pictures", Oberholtzer chastises the motion picture industry for trying to pawn these films off as
"educational", warning young women not to betray the pure image of their gender.55 Oberholtzer is
equally critical of movie producers using women's issues to sensationalize their movies such as films
about female diseases, sexual intercourse, or abortion. "These [sexual] scenes are introduced for
entertainment," wrote Oberholtzer, "Someone sees value in them for general sale...and he takes them
out on circuit for gain."56 While it is easy to agree with Oberholtzer's objections to the amount of sex on
the screen as Saylor points out, what is not often realized is the huge role that movie houses and motion
pictures played in the women's suffrage movement for recruitment and publication purposes. Whereas
movie theatres acted as socialization center for immigrants and the working class, they also served as a
political center outside the social norms for women.57 Unlike the playhouse or theater of their parent's
generation where tradition dictated a women's place, movie houses were much more liberal, allowing
both single and married women of all classes to freely intermix as well as take an active role in
presentation of films and the discussion of topics. Women's rights leaders often persuaded theater
owners to show films with pro-‐suffrage themes and several women became important actresses,
55 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 30-31. Print. 56 Oberholtzer 36. 57 Ross, Steven Joseph. Working-Class Hollywood: Silent Film and the Shaping of Class in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1998. 26-27. Print.
21 | P a g e
producers, or even directors in the early motion picture industry.58 While Oberholtzer doesn't
completely dismiss such activities, one can see how the upper class' view of suffragettes may have
caused him a few tough decisions on the Board of Censor. "The good which can occur from instructing
the young about such [topics] under proper circumstances I would not underrate," Oberholtzer admits,
"...but to cry sex [or gender rights]...from the highest places...is in my judgment contrary to public
policy."59
58 Ross 27. 59 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 39. Print.
22 | P a g e
When examining the records of the Pennsylvania Board of Censor, one movie in particular
jumps out as the ultimate limit to Oberholtzer's "tolerance" for women's issues in film. The movie was a
1916 release entitled Where are My Children?, which dealt with the issues of
female contraception and abortion.60 Such topics were central in the debate
over women's rights in early Twentieth Century America stemming in part from
the trial of Margaret Sanger for disobeying
New York contraception laws to the public
criticism of the unfair nature of
contraception help, which was open to
women of wealth and privilege, but not to
their neighbors of lower origin.61 The
brainchild of female director Lois Weber,
who used her movies to speak to women's
issues, the film told the story of a prominent district attorney who is prosecuting a doctor for providing
illegal contraception when he discovers that his wife has been a regular client of the accused doctor,
even receiving abortions from him. Enraged, he confronts his wife, threatening her with charges of
manslaughter for their unborn children.62 The film was deemed too controversial for show in many
states and Oberholtzer, in testimony before the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, called the film
"unspeakably vile" and lead the charge to ban it, claiming that it "tended to debase or corrupt [the]
morals [of young women]".63 In response, Weber's production company took the Board to court, but
withdrew their appeal after their "educational" defense was gutted when the Board's lawyers entered
60 Mahar, Karen Ward. Women Filmmakers in Early Hollywood. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2006. 96-97. Print. 61 Mahar 97. 62 Ross, Steven Joseph. Working-Class Hollywood: Silent Film and the Shaping of Class in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1998. 97. Print. 63 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22.
Figure 13: The title card for the Lois Weber film Where Are My Children? (The Museum of Moving Image, New York)
Figure 12: Female film director Lois Weber (The Historical Society of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia)
23 | P a g e
into evidents excerpts from the pro-‐contraception book Birth Control, which Weber had used as her
inspiration for the movie.64 These selection was further heightened with the showing of one of the
movie's scenes where the death of a lower class servant girl is due to a purposefully botched abortion.
Fearful of the social impact among Pennsylvania's lower classes, such testimony did not sit well with the
Court ensuring that even if producers has continued with their case, defeat was a foregone conclusion.65
While Oberholtzer's true feelings on women's right might remain a topic of debate, it is clear
that there were limits to Oberholtzer's open-‐mindedness on feminist topics when they went against
established social norms of the time.
64 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22. 65 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22
24 | P a g e
Part V -‐ Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer: The Political Player-‐ "The Board shall consist of three residents and citizens of Pennsylvania...well qualified by education and experience to act as censors under this act." -‐ Section 3, Pennsylvania Law for Censorship of Moving Pictures66 "The [members of the Board] before assuming the duties...shall take and subscribe the oath prescribed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania, and shall enter into bond with the Commonwealth..." -‐ Section 10, Pennsylvania Law for Censorship of Moving Pictures67
"The type of [person] who is adapted for this branch of service should not be hard to discover, "
wrote Oberholtzer, "without any question members
of such Boards should not be politicians...Though
they may fill every other department of government
with riff-‐raff of the political party, here is one place...
where there is room for only the finest judgment and
the highest probity."68 While such sentiments are
admirable, the Board of Censor itself was anything but
a non-‐political player. If there is an area of agreement
with Saylor, it is that from its members to the movies it chose to edit, politics was influential in the
Board's decision-‐making process under Oberholtzer. While Saylor makes light of this topic, the influence
of politics on Oberholtzer goes much deeper than simple objectivity.
Oberholtzer's appointment to the Board in 1915 was the subject of political whispering from the
start and he openly admitted that his appointment was due to his friendship with Governor Brumbaugh,
who Oberholtzer had worked under during his time in the Philadelphia public school system.69 The other
66 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 205. Print. 67 Oberholtzer 207 68 Oberholtzer 179-180 69 Aronson, Michael. Nickelodeon City: Pittsburgh at the Movies, 1905-1929. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 172. Print.
Figure 14: The facade of the Pennsylvania State Capital prior to its dedication in 1906 (Pennsylvania State
Archives, Harrisburg)
25 | P a g e
original members of the Board, J.L. Breitinger and Katherine Niver, were equally well politically
connected. Breitinger was a fundraiser for the Republican Party and Niver was the wife of an influential
Pittsburgh editor and a friend of former Governor Tener's wife, the man who original signed the movie
censorship bill into law.70 From the start, the Board would be fighting political battles not only with the
state and the movie industry, but among each other. Oberholtzer openly despised Breitinger's continued
political activities and lobbied to have him replaced, which eventually happened in 1917. "[Breitinger's
removal] was brought about for the reason that his political activities were preventing the Board from
giving the State the best service," testified Oberholtzer.71 Obviously anyone preserved as an obstacle to
the business of the Board, became an enemy in Oberholtzer's mind, even if it included members of the
General Assembly. In April of 1917, a bill was proposed by State Senator Charles Snyder that would
lessen the power of the Board by making it reportable to Auditor General's office.72 Incensed,
Oberholtzer began a letter writing campaign to friendly members of the Senate, urging them to vote the
measure down. His efforts ultimately proved successful. The Board even went so far as to curry political
favors from other branches of the state government, such as the courts (who provided regular support
through their rulings), and from the local political districts themselves by the placement of their offices
and screening rooms.73
Outside of Harrisburg, Oberholtzer saw the motion picture industry as a political monster unto
itself and vowed to keep politically charged topics out of Pennsylvania's movie houses. "They [the
motion picture industry] revile politics and yet they enter it...[bringing] themselves face to face with the
very condition which they profess to abhor," blasted Oberholtzer.74 He proposed the idea of a Federal
70 Aronson 171-172 71 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Letter to Miss Emily P. Bissell. 8 Mar. 1917. MS. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 72 United States. Pennsylvania State Senate. Journal of the Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Part I. Harrisburg: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1917. Print. 1213. 73 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Letter to William E. Crow, Esq. 14 Jan. 1918. MS. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 74 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 155. Print.
26 | P a g e
Board of Censor, creating lists of movies deemed decent for national viewership (the so-‐called “white
lists”), prepared preliminary Federal legislation, and traveled the country speaking and writing on the
benefits of movie censorship.75 “I have spoken in many parts of Pennsylvania and in other states about
[this] subject and we have gained creditable recognition all over the country..where what we do is
watched and followed," triumphantly wrote Oberholtzer.76
Two examples of Oberholtzer's political agenda on the Board's work can be seen with the review
of two politically charged films, 1915's The Birth of a Nation and 1916's War Brides. Long considered a
classic of American cinema, The Birth of a Nation was a movie that cut to the heart of Oberholtzer's
political and professional experience, especially when it came to the villainous character of Austin
Stoneman, widely considered to be based on fiery Pennsylvania Republican Thaddeus Stevens. In a
letter written to the owner of a Philadelphia movie house, Oberholtzer expresses satisfaction that the
Stevens-‐based character has been deleted from the film prior to its release in Pennsylvania, "I am glad
you are making some eliminations...so that the memory of old Thad Stevens will not be quite so much
outraged in his own State..."77 Saylor makes the argument that Oberholtzer objected to the negative
portrayal of Stevens on historical grounds, but there is reason to believe that objections were also made
out of political necessity as well. Pennsylvania was firmly a Republican state and any negative portrayal
of any Republican figure could have inflamed public passions. "If the press is a large factor in politics,"
warned Oberholtzer, "[than] the screen may be a yet greater one..."78 It is not hard to see Oberholtzer
dutifully protecting his Republican supporters in Harrisburg. The implications of the 1916 film War
Brides go even bigger. Set in war-‐torn Europe, the movie focused on German soldiers attacking and
raping civilian women. While Oberholtzer was not known as a friend to Pennsylvania's German
75 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. "The Censor and the Movie "Menace"" Ed. George Harvey. North American Review 212 (1920): 641. Print. 76 Olberholtzer, Ellis P. Letter to the Senator Boies Penrose (R-PA). 14 Jan. 1918. MS. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 77 Oberholtzer, Ellis P. Letter to Mr McSween, Cheastnut Street Opera House. 3 Sept. 1915. MS. Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 78 Oberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. The Morals of the Movie. Philadelphia: Penn, 1922. 173. Print.
27 | P a g e
population (his appointment in 1915 had been criticized due to anti-‐German remarks he had made in
the past), the Board ordered significant cuts to the film before it was granted release.7980 Perhaps this
could be seen as another example of nativist sentiment until two years later, upon America's entry into
World War I, Federal authorities order War Brides and any other German films banned completely,
fearful that they would "[run] contrary to the spirit which should exist in this country in its present
crisis."81 Despite this Federal order, the
Board was encouraging by the idea of
using motion pictures to support the war
effort. "Many of the transcripts in film of
war conditions in Europe awaken
enthusiasm..." states the Board's 1917
report. Later records for the Pennsylvania
Board of Censor show a marked uptick in
the amount of newsreel stories marked
for a approval by the panel.82
Despite Oberholtzer's sizable political influence, in the end it would not save him. When
Governor William P. Sproul took office in 1919, the film industry pushed to have Oberholtzer removed
from the Board. Seeing Oberholtzer as "too heavy a political load to carry", Sproul relieved him of his
position despite a massive letter-‐writing campaign by supporters to save his job.83
79 Mayer, B. J. Letter to Governor Martin Brumbough from the German-American Alliance of Pennsylvania. 19 May 1915. MS. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 80 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22. 81 Brown, Francis S. (Pennsylvania Attorney General) Letter to Frank R. Shattuck, Philadelphia. 23 Oct. 1917. MS. The Pennsylvania State Archives, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 82 United States. Pennsylvania Board of Censor. Records of the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Rules, Procedure, and Forms 1915-1956. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Archives, 1916. Microfilm. RG-22. 83 Hamilton, Clayton. "Movie, Censor, and Public." The New York Evening Post [New York City] 30 Dec. 1922: 128-32. Print.
Figure 15: A scene from the 1916 film War Brides with German soldiers storming into the home of a female civilian (The Museum of Moving
Image, New York)
28 | P a g e
A Final Conclusion – Putting Dr. Oberholtzer in the Context of his Times:
While Richard Saylor does an admirable job presenting one side of Dr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer's
character, it is obvious there is much more to this man than just a loyal and morally conscience public
servant. Oberholtzer was a man that was molded by the times he lived in and the social surroundings
that defined the early Twentieth Century in America. Issues of nativism, class, gender roles, and social
order massively influenced Oberholtzer’s motivations on the Pennsylvania Board of Censor and his view
of feminism in society, his desire to preserve law and order in the streets, and his anxiety to the rising
tide of immigrant and working class furry influenced the films Oberholtzer helped censor all of which
were justified by a moral constitution. His quest to continue such work would lead him into the unsavory
world of politics, a world that would give him great influence, but would eventually cost him his
position. While Saylor’s image of Oberholtzer as a moral crusader should not be completely ignored
because it does provide a certain context for viewing how Oberholtzer viewed himself and his time
period, the greater influences of nativism and class conflict should not be ignored. To omit such
historical evidence from the great narrative of history is neither right nor safe, because it changes the
human complexity of our state's leading historical figures. While the issue of censorship may always be
an issue that is debated and legislated by civic authorities, it is important to keep in the back of our
minds the lessons of the past and remember how societal norms plays on our morals and our decisions
of right and wrong for they will be remembered for posterity, much like the actions of Dr. Ellis P.
Oberholtzer.
29 | P a g e
Figure 16: Official Seal of Approval of the Pennsylvania Board of Censors. This seal was required to be placed at the head of each film shown in Pennsylvania between 19 14 and 1956. (Pennsylvania State Archives, Harrisburg)