THE OUTBREAK OF OBSCENITY.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 5, 6 July 1906, Page 2

THE OUTBREAK OF OBSCENITY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — Your admirable talk on the lewd postcard question is slightly to be qualiiied by a fact which has probably escaped your notice. You blame the police for inactivity in regard of this public scandal. The police have not beeu entirely inactive. As representing the Church Council, I -waited on Inspector Ellison, and showed him samples of dirtily suggestive stuff which had been purchased in reputable bookshops in this city. He laid his finger on one of tho worst of the lot — a card which had been specially printed for sale in this colony," and which was as bawdy as a thing could be — and said that he had prosecuted on that very card, and tha local Magistrate had dismissed the case. The law requires that the court be satisfied as to the lewd intentions of such productions. The local court is not easily satisfied. I enclose for your information the card in question. ' If Magistrates meet the efforts of the police by ruling that such cards are decent, an Offensive Publications Act is a dead letter. I should imagine that police activity has been paralysed 'by Dr. M f Arthur's decision. Your spirited comments on the situation should lead |to fresh prosecution^. The public are vastly in your debt. If the law proves powerless there are other ways of smiting unprincipled booksellers, and there are men in this' city who mean to see that those means are put into swift opera1 tiou. — 1 am.-vetc, J. J. NORTH, Secretary Church Council. 4th July. ' SOME ENGLISH CASES. EXEMPLARY FINES. At Marlborough-street (says the London Daily Telegraph of March last), Louis BoulaEse, of 3, Princes-street, Coventry-street, W., was summoned for exposing in his shop window objectionable picture postcards. Mr. Arthur Newton defended. Detective-Sergeant West spoke to executing a search warrant with Detective-Inspector Bower and Sergeant Curry and seizing a number of picture postcards. Ten of the cards objected to were in the shop window, and over' one thusand cards were taken from the shop. Mr. Newton, while agreeing that somo of - the cards came within the Act, .contended that a large, number were not objectionable. The wholesale firms who supplied the retailers with them were not proceeded against, and some of the cards emanated from two English, firms. Mr. Kennedy said he would like to have the names of those firms to submit them to the Commissioner of Police. Mr. NeVrton accordingly supplied the names of the firms, and added that defendant had

sold his business. Mr. Kennedy re« marked that there had been many convictions against the sellers of such cards, but the offence had not been brought home sufficiently to them. He imposed a fine of £25 and 4s costs, and ordered the cards in question to be destroyed. R. C. Willis, of 1, Green-street, Leicester-square, was similarly summoned. Mr, Newton defended. Detec-tive-Sergeant West produced the card* he had seized at the defendant's shop. Mr. Newton contended that the cards of Eastern beauties, of Japanese people, and some showing Zulus playing ping* pong — (laughter) — were not objectionable. Mr. Kennedy thought that other cards were, and imposed a fine of £5 and 4s costs, remarlcing that the case was not as bad as tho previous one." William George, of 10, Green-street, was also summoned for the same offence. Evidence as to seizure of cards was given. Counsel defending urged that although* indelicate and vulgar, some of the cards could hardly be called objectionable within the meaning of the Act. Mr. Kennedy imposed a fine of £25 and 4s costs, with an order to destroy.