The Washington times., 1919-12-13

and liable 10 seizure for that reason
under the English statute.
at appeared that it was pub
lished to expose the alleged immorali.
ties of private confession in the Ro-
man Catholic Church. But the court
having found that passages purport-
ing to be extracts from the writings
of Roman Catholics were obscene in
fact, IL was held that the intent Of
the publication, however innocent,
was no answer to the proceeding"
Federal Courts Rule.
"And the rule in the Federal courts
is in accord. (Curton v. U. s., 142
Fed, 81; U. S. V. Harmon. As Fed :.
421; U. S. v. Slenker, 81 Fed, 603:
u. S. v. Bennett, 16. Blatch, 36S, U.
S. v. Means, - Fed, 605. As well
as in other States. Commonwealth
v. Marsh, Metc, IMassl, 472; state
V. Brown, 81 Vermont. 619; Steele v.
Bannon, r., C. l., Series 287.)
This leaves the inquiry as to hat
test should be applied to ascertain
whether the statute forbidding OBJ
scene. Iewd, lasciviotN, filthy, inde-
cent or disgusting publications is vio-
lated. This, likewise, is we'll settled.
In People v. Muller. (supra) 1t Is
said:
The test of an obscene book was
stated in Regina v. Hicklin IL. R., 3
O., B. 360). to be whether the tendency
of the matter charged as obscenity is
to deprave or corrupt those whose
minds are open to such immoral in
fiuences and who might come in con-
tact with it. We think ii would also
he q ~ nhSoonffu IN n
painting or statue whether the motive
of the painting or statue, so to speak,
as indicated by IL, Is pure or impure,
whether it is naturally calculated to
excite in a spectator impure ina gina
tions, and whether the other incidents
and qualities, however attractive,
were merely accessory. to this as the
primary or main purpose of the repre-
sentation.'"
Further IlIumined.
And this is further iIlumined by
U. S. v. Clarke. 81 Fed, 734, as fol
lows:
There is to be found in every
class of people wh1
are so intelligent or so mature that
their minds are not liable to be
affected by reading matter, however
obscence, lewd and indecent it may be.
Then there is another large class to
be found in every communicative
young and immature, the ignorant
and those who are sensually inclined
who are liable TO be influenced to
their harm by reading indecent AMI
obscence publications. The statute
under which this indictment is framed
was designed to protect the latter
class from harm and it is a whole
some statute.
Hence. in judging of the ten
dency of the publication to depravc
and corrupt the mind. or to excite
lustful or sexual desires (Which are
the tests of obscenity and lewdness)
you should consider the effect tha.
the publication would have on the
minds of that class of persons whom
the statute aims to protect. and the
of the publication to get into
the hands of that class of persons,
rather than the effect such pubIica-
tions would have on people of a high
order of intelligence and those who
have reached mature years and by
reason of their intelligence or years
are steeled against such influence.
"This Book Is FILTHY,
THE foregoing states with extreme
aptness the purpose of Section 1141
anu the test Vi what violates IL. AD-
plying this test / am constrained to
hold there is no manner of doubt that
this book, judged by the standard of
its probable effect on the class in
the community the statute aims to
protect, is obscene, lewd, lascivious,
filthy, indecent and disgusting.
Moreover, my determination inde-
pendently arrived at is such that /
concur unreservedly in the literary
comments i have quoted above Hav-
ing in view the large class of young,
immature as well as
the ignorant and mature sensually in
clined, in the community. no healthy
mind that is not jaundiced or de-
fected from a correct perspective by
overmuch sleeping in and brooding
on the problem of vice and sexual
or degradation could ar
rive at any other conclusion.
This is accentuated by the rccor-
milton of it by the putative prostitute
in her own work in which she in
Weighs. at page 322 ct seq, against the
effect of publication of
Of an eIamplar.
Young Could Get Book.
Applying the test of the cases to
the admission OF the writer in the in
to this book, to wit: sOf
course, Madeleine can hardly be rec
to youth of tender years
. it must be banned under
section 1141, as this is. the very class
the section aims to protect. Espe-
cially since the evidence is that the
book is distributed and sold promiscu-
ously on the counters of various de-
partment store and booksellers. .
-"While IT is to the credit of the de
fendant. Brainard, that he does not
seek to evade responsibility, but
rather to absolve the defendant. Har
ris. a. minor employe.. still am con-
strained to say that | regret that the
Clinton T. Brainard. the
responsible head of Harper
Brothers. with that houses standing
and traditions of 113 years. should,
without apology for this books pub
lication. seek to justify such a clearly
filthy, lascivious and de-