INDECENT DOCUMENT

Evening Star, Issue 22684, 25 June 1937, Page 8

INDECENT DOCUMENT

MAGISTRATE CONVICTS OH “JEGEAK" FICTURE [Per United Press Association.] AVELLINGTON, June 25. In his reserved decision in a case involving the question, what is indecent? Mr .Stihvell, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court to-day held that tho picture 1 Garments of Nakedness ’ in tho Auckland magazine, • Health and Sunshine,’ was not indecent, but that another picture, ‘ rEgean,’ was, and that the defendant, Morris Edward Lehaney, bookseller, of Willis street, was accordingly guilty of exhibiting and selling an indecent document. Mr Birks, who appeared for the prosecution, after consultation with Detective-sergeant J. Doyle, said defendant had not been before the court before, and that ho did not ask for a heavy penalty. Mr AV. Mellish, for defendant, said he would like to consult his principals, the proprietors of the magazine ‘ Health and Sunshine,’ as the amount of penalty might affect tho question of appeal. He asked that the penalty be held over. This 1 was agreed to. Mr Stihvell quoted the legal provisions governing what constituted indecency in such cases. Largely the matter turned on the object of defendant in displaying a picture, the art value or intention of the picture itself, and tho effect the picture would have _on the minds of those who looked at it. The Magistrate admitted that there was a big change in the public attitude on these matters from bygone years. He distinguished the differences between the two pictures, ‘ Garments of -Nature’ being a side view that did not show up the human form, as was the case with tho other. On the question of intent, in displaying the pictures (oueiied out on a double page) ho held that tho object was to induce sales of the magazine, he held also that, while the effect of the picture ‘ /Egean ’ might not be adverse on mature years, it would be detrimental in the case of young people. .