Tenn. High Court Holds 'Curley' Ban Invalid MEMPHIS—Cha'rman Lloyd T. Binford and the Memphis Board of Censors had no authority to ban from Memphis screens the motion picture "Curley" because it showed Negro actors in the cast, the supreme court of Tennessee has held. However, Tennessee's highest court threw out the case attacking the right of Memphis censors to ban exhibition of the picture on grounds that the complainants, Hal Roach, Inc., and United Artists Corp., were not motion picture exhibitors. Not being exhibitors —the supreme court held—the plaintiffs were not denied freedom of speech and secondly that they had no standing in Tennessee courts because they are out-of-state corporations and have not complied with the laws of the state. ENDS TWO-YEAR BATTLE This decision, rendered at Nashville last Saturday, brought to an end a two-year court fight which followed the dec sion of the Memphis censors that the film "Curley" could not be shown in Memphis because it showed white and Negro children playing together and attending the same school. The fight on censors was joined by the Motion Picture Ass'n of America and charges that the censors had violated the constitutional rights of the producers and distributors were made. Binford had said "the South does not permit Negroes in white schools nor recognize social equality between the races, even among children." United Artists and the Roach studios had argued that the private act in Tennessee creating the censor board was unconstitutional and that the board had no legal authority to disapprove the picture because of the presence of Negroes in the cast. The abbreviated ruling of the supreme court, read by Chief Justice A. B. Neil, follows: "United Artists Corporation et al vs. Board of Censors et al—Shelby Law, United Artists, a Motion Picture distributor, and Hal Roach, Inc., questioned the authority of the Board of Censors of Memphis to ban the exhibition of a picture, "Curley," on the ground that members of the Negro race were among the actors on the screen. TWO CONTENTIONS ARE LISTED "Contention is made (1) that the private act creating the board is invalid as an abridgment of 'freedom of speech' and (2) the board was not legally authorized to disapprove the picture. "Held that appellants are not in position to question the valid ty of the act, since there is nothing to show that either of the appellants is an exhibitor, and hence they are not denied freedom of speech. "Wh le the board had no authority to disapprove the picture because of Negro actors appearing in the picture, this contention being correct as a sound proposition of law, yet the appellants cannot maintain this suit because as a foreign corporation it was doing business in Tennessee without first complying with the laws of the state." The office of the secretary of state said Binford Says No More Racial Films Barred MEMPHIS—Chairman Lloyd T. Binford, who has attracted national attention by banning from Memphis screens motion pictures dealing with race relations, said he would bar no more shows for racial pictures. "We'll just have to pass these pictures," Binford said. "Frankly, it was what I was looking for, judging from President Truman's recent actions." Binford further said: "We would still ban 'Lost Boundaries' on the grounds that the leading character, a Negro passing as a white, was an impostor and liar. The people of his New Hampshire home town resented him until the minister in the film smoothed it over." Binford said that the censor board's recent approval of such films as "Home of the Brave," "Pinky" and "Intruder in the Dust," was influenced "by an inkling of what the court's attitude probably would be." Just last weekend, the stage show, "A Streetcar Named Desire," written by a former Memphian, Tennessee Williams, played three times at Ellis Auditorium without censorship changes. "If it had been a movie, attracting an audience of children, it would not have been passed," B nford said. "But the audience was 98 per cent adult and knew what it was getting." Binford and the attorneys for the city and county who defended the "Curley" suit made it plain there would be no change on Memphis censorship so far as immorality, lewdness and general undesirability were concerned. United Artists had not registered in Tennessee and that the state law requires an out-ofstate corporation wishing to do business in the state to file a copy of its charter, pay a $300 fee and to appoint an agent for service of process. Memphis' legal staff represented the censors when the case was filed in Circuit Judge Henderson's court in Memphis. Judge Henderson ruled that United Artists and the Roach studios had no legal standing in Tennessee courts. Blevins Comic Xmas Card Credited to Tom Little NASHVILLE, TENN.—The Blevms Popcorn Co.'s annual comic Christmas card mailed each December to the firm's customers and friends all over the country was done this year by Tom Little, Jim Blevins has announced here. Little is the Nashville Tennessean's political cartoonist, and is also creator of the syndicated cartoon feature, "Sunflower Street." GOLDWYN PLAYS SANTA Under the huge 40-foot Christmas tree erected by Samuel Goldwyn in the foyer of the United Artists Theatre in downtown Los Angeles, Pat DeCicco, operating head of the United Artists Theatres in California, and Producer Goldwyn (dressed as Santa Glaus) are shown handing out gifts to underprivileged children of Los Angeles. This is part of the twoday Christmas gift party held at the United Artists Theatre on December 23, 24 by Goldwyn in conjunction with the showing of his recent picture, "My Foolish Heart," starring Dana Andrews and Susan Hayward. The film wiU be internationally premiered at the Four Star and United Artists theatres in Los Angeles on Christmas day. Checking Action Settled With 21 Exhibitors PITTSBURGH—Out of court settlements have been made by all local area independent exhibitors involved, except one, in the alleged irregular or false checking civil action in federal court here. This is the statement of a leading theatre owner, who announced "a satisfactory settlement" in the litigation (3052) also listed as Morris Roth et al vs. Paramount et al. Twenty-three exhibitors, according to th's spokesman, have concluded and have settled accounts. Bart Dattola, New Kensington, dismissed attorneys representing the 41 theatres in the action, and engaged Margiotti and Casey, as reported here. The Roth et al action was entered by exhibitors to prevent "a fishing expedition into the theatres' books and records" by attorneys representing film distributors. Their proposal backfired. Pox six years the action was moving in the western district court here holding the attention of three consecutive federal court judges. Sargoy and Stein, New York law firm, was counsel for the film distributors, and attorneys for the exhibitors were J. Roy Dickie and Nathan M. Katz, Pittsburgh. The New Kensington theatre owner, who has refused to budge, has nothing to report for publication. No other exhibitor involved has volunteered any information on the announced settlements. Branch managers of film companies here have no knowledge of the civil action or its disposal. 16 BOXOFFICE December 24, 1949
y .X X / ^s^ OvRSPRCf^. }f^ mf^ocrm Hits mmofm PIMKY [UlMinmiuv EmrBOBromir fisimiioimofthepum nuns' MWHWAY I WMS A MAU WAR BRIK COME TO nE STABU SUHERY'S HURRKARE rOU'RE Mr EVERYTRm CAMADIAH PACIFIC IT MAPPERS EVERT SPRIMB / Mr. BEIVEDERE Goes To College """ Winterize your Theatre Now with ^2 O'CLOCK HIGH DANCING MS THE DARK WHIRLPOOL WHEN WILLIE COMES MARCHING HOME )
Change language