Arizona republican., 1908-05-21

with actual favor or at least with tol- eration.
 "I believe that divorce and kindred evils are tolerated and accepted by the people," said Mrs. Jean M. Hyde. head ! of the movement TOT purity in litera- 1 ture conducted by the w. C. T. U., "as entirely normal incidents and eXperi- ! ences of life in consequence of every day familiarity with them in the pages
 of modern. fiction. I have for years
 made a special study of the tendency and effect of this kind of reading and have been all but discouraged at the astounding indifference of refOrmers to
 this tremendous force which acts di- rectly on the people and to a large
 extent decides their opinions and de- termine their customs. Many, most interested in uplift, bewail the result
 of these formative agencies as evil
 denced in modern conditions. But they
 make the mistake of treating effects as the point of attack instead of seek
 ing out, or even recognizing plainly
 evident causes"
 "The whole agitation for an official
 censorship of books is a part of the
 craze for the regulation of every con ceivable phase of human activity that has taken possession of the people of this country within the post few years" said a publisher who brings out many books by popular writers. Tt may have been founded in reason
 in the beginning but it certainly has
 run to ridiculous lengths. From a
 moral viewpoint there is no nation in the world so exacting in the standards ! that it demands of it's writers as is
 the United States. So familiar Is this to the publishing trade that many
 books which been successful in other countries and which possess genuine | literary merit cannot be produced here on account of their failure to satisfy this requirement.
 While books may be brought out l occasionally concerning which there is a difference of opinion, no American publishing house Of any standing will issue a book that could be regarded by the majority of the people as i'm moral. As an example of this, one of | the largest and best publishing houses | in New York a few years ago suppress | ed a book bv a clever and talented young author after it had actually
 been put in type and thousands of dol | lars had ben spent in printing a big | edition They did it because it was ! pointed out to them that one chapter ! in the book had a significance which had been overlooked by their editors in passing upon it. It wasn't an inn moral book. aside from this one chap ter. and the publishers might have been
 excused if they had tried to sell enough | copies to get back the money they had invested but they preferred to stand the money loss rather than to put out under their imprint anything that might be regarded as lowering the standards os their business or that might possibly harm readers of un- formed minds. Anyway a censorship doesn't prevent the issuance of bad l books It only adds to the burdens Of publishers, puts a damper on the. pro- duction oe real literature and substi- tues the judgment of one man for that of the public as a whole. The entire
 theory on which our government IS founded s that that is a dangerous thing to do"
 Personally don't believe in literary policemen" said David Graham Phil lips, one of the popular novelists who