INDECENT LITERATURE.

Press, Volume XLVII, Issue 7450, 16 January 1890, Page 3

INDECENT LITERATURE.

The adjourned hearing of the cases against Messrs C. C. So__«£rs, W. H. Soaking, J. Anderson, StepjUji Powell, and Charles H. Rhodes, for havtngin their possession alleged is&jswa? books, was caUed on yesterday in6fauz_£at the Reaide-t-lagisfcrata's vohrLmm Ifessra R. Bee_uam7B.M > , apd J.P. Mr J. C. Mtutln appeared to prosecute, and Mr Stringer for 1 tpe defendants. On tub cases being called on, Mr Martin said that the infagaaatloa aa laid was for an Indictable aasaco, yis., that the defendants had these eol&$ in their possession, with the I-_anTu!n of publication. There was no efe&lats which would enable the case to m fiftftlt with summarily before thair WomJOss, oi he would have been glad to avail mmam of the opportunity of doing so. It was the first case of the kind in this district, and he believed in the colony; and in tooklng up the English reports of similar bases he found that only a small flne had been imposed. Looking to this, and the mot that under the present form of information the cases would have to go to the Supreme Court, the country would be put to a good deal of expense, with the result that a flne only could be inflicted. Under these circumstances his learned Mend Mr Stringer, who appeared for the defendants, had agreed & plead guilty to the technical oflSncs of aping the books in their possession with the Intention of publication. This being so, he (Mr Martin) had decided to withdraw the present information, and bring the charge under under the City By-law No. 6,18a_, section 58. , Mr Stringer said that under t£6 circumstances stated by his learned friend, Mr Martin, he w,aa willing that the course proposed should be followed, and on behalf of the defendants he pleaded " Guilty " of the technical offence of having the books in their possession. He might say that, as their Worships probably t were aware, Mr Vi_etelly, M. Zola s publisher in England, had been prosecuted for selling these books, but only one of those objected to there—" Nana — was included in the present proßecufcion, He had seen the books how before the Court, and whilst he could not say that they were worse than many other works in foreign languages, he did not see his way clear to discriminate between them and the others, on account of which prosecutions had taken place at Home. Therefore he had decided to submit to the judgment of the Court. Since the prosecution of Mr Vizetelly at Home, he i understood that there had been no importation of the books complained of. I These books, which were the subject of the present prosecution, were meraly those which had been in stock at the time when, previous to the prosecution o' Mr | Vizetelly, these works were exposed for sale in almost every bookseller's shop. Unless every book was read as it came into the shop—which their Worships would see was an impossibility—■ i there was no means of knowing what the books were. He would desire to call the attention of the Bench to the faot that as regarded one of the books—that in French—the leaves were still uncut, so that it would be seen that no one knew of the character of it. Under these circumstances he would ask tbe Bench to impose | merely a nominal penalty, and the defendants would undertake not to sell any more of the books, Mr Beetham said that his opinion on | the matter was that the less that was said about this matter the better. No doubt these books were filthy, but he was bound to say that he had read things quite as bad m other books. Of course two wrongs did not make a right, and, as he had said, the less said about such things as these the better. The defendants would be fined 40s each, with professional fee and Court costs.