Great Falls daily tribune., 1920-04-01
HASKIN LETTER
POLICING OUR RLlTERATURE,.
By FREDERIC J. HASKIN

worthless literature could be used ruth
lessly for the suppression of any book
whatever, even though the first class in
telligence of the whole world had joined
in proclaiming it masterpiece.
Not only this, but Comstock and his
| successors have shown that they do not
even need to find jury which will agree
| with them. They have repeatedly sup
pressed books by merely threatening
prosecution. 1t is the nuisance and ex-
pense Of law suit. and still more. the
besmearing of their regulations which
publisher and author alike fear.
The viewpoint of the Comstocks is
simple, and one which no doubt appeals
to many Americans. 1t is expressed in
| the title Of one of their pamphlets, which
is labeled: MORALS. Not Art or Lit.
erature.' They take the view that No
book which could conceivably incte any
one, however young or feeble minded. to
| think immoral thoughts, or do immoral
acts, should be allowed in print. They
imply that morals are allimportant and
literature of no Importance at all.
No one denies the Importance of social
| morality, or that the young and unso-
phisticated should be protected from
demoralizing influences Of every kind;
but good many deny that such protec-
ton involves the destruction of all works
of art which are not suited to the young
and unsophisticated. All applaud when
a book ike Only Boy is suppressed,
but a good many dissent and some howl
with rage when work like Jude the
Obscure" by Thomas Eardy. one of the
most famous novelists in the world, is
attacked on the same ground and by in
ference put in the sa1pe class.
It has been shown tint the Comstocks
have erected machine which makes it
possible for them sometimes to suppress
a book, on their own Judgment, by a
mere wave of the handy But even if he
! goes into court, the autlor or publisher
is given no fair chank.. according to
Mr.. Mencken, who has Saldied all of the
decisions in such cases He cannot
allege in his defense thb the offending
work was put forth forE egitimate, nee
essary ard decent purp1es; he cannot
allege that q passage cpnpiained Of is
from a standard work telf in general
circulation; ho cannot l,ffer evidence
that the person to whonI, book or pic
ture was sold or exhibiti was not ac-
tually dcpraved by it, or e.ely to be de-
praved by it: he cannot hkt his defense
on the lack of such effe@ on the jury
men themselves; he cantt plead that
the alleged obscenity, in toint Of fact.
10 couched in decent and &objectiona.ssa ssa
language elsewhere. Finn} all the de-
cisions deny the defendanl the right to
introduce any testimony, Vether expert
or otherwise, that books Of artistic
value and not p~rnographidand that its
effect upon normal pcrsonl is not per-
nicious."
The quotation is from ncken's "a
Book of Prefaces,' and he ties in foot
notes the eases in which kesc prccc-
dents have been established He surely
describes curious legal chinery to
exist in country which IS opposed to
be, the home Of free press, Zee speech,
individual liberty and justit
|, The actual working OF thu legal ma
chine have been exceedingly irregular.
For example. two books b@ American
authors Of high repute ptlished by
American publishers in god standing
have been attacked within rd9nt years,
, One Of these was "Hacar l4elly." by
Daniel Carson Goodman. and he other
| ..The Genius" by Theodore Dresser.
, During the same time two noy ys BY the
I Russian. Artzibashcf have ds pub