PSYCHE AND HER BATH

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 6025, 9 October 1906, Page 5

PSYCHE AND HER BATH

ALLEGED INDECENT PICTURES. THE AUCKLAND PROSECUTION. PRESS ASSOCIATION. AUCKLAND. October 8. Giving his decision in the cases against two person© charged with Bolling conics of Lord fjoightou'e picture "Psyche a Bath," and of the picture “Psycho at Nature’s Mirror" by Paul Shairmann, the pictiuoe being allege.l to bo indecent,, Mr Kettle, S.M., said the question was whether the sale of these pictures to n constable was a breach of tho Offensive i uhlicalions Act, ft would bo a gn»> libel of famous works to characterise “Psyche’s Bath” as iiulecont. There w».» an entire ■absence of impure suggestion amt nothing offensive to decency or good morals. Tho picture was not intended ta have, using tho words of the statuio. «u “indecent, immoral, or obscene effect.' 11 was not seriously contended that

"Psyche at Nature's Mirror” was indecent or obscene. Both informations would be dismissed.

The Magistrate added Hint ho wished, it to bo clearly understood that ho did not hold that photographs of these on postcards ought to be indiscriminately exhibited and sold to boys and girls. A great deal must depend on the manner and extent in which tho sale, publication, or exhibition was made. Tho pictures wore works of true and pure art—vastly different from the postcards which he condemned o few days ago. If it we® true that the indiscriminate exhibition in shop windows of works of pure art was found to be prejudicially affecting the public morals to any appreciable extent it might bo the duty of Parliament to legislate on tho subject.

"TO. THE PURE ALL THINGS ARE PURE.”

In the foregoing case two Auckland picture dealers wore prosecuted for celling the pictures named, "on tho ground® that they were of an indecent nature.'' Tho pictures are so well-known that considerable interest was aroused in tho matter, and the Magistrate, Mr Kettle, took a lot of evidence, as well ns time for consideration, before giving his judgment. Adjutant Gordon, of the Salvation Array, gave his opinion that the pictures were obscene. They would not be so, ho said, to people of on artistio temperament, but on young people they would be calculated to have a demoralising effect, Mrs Hutchinson, in charge of tho Door of Hope, while admitting that the, pictures were artistic, said they should not be exposed for sale, ns 50 percent. of the people who saw them would, not think of them in an artistic sense. Adjutant Dixon, of the Salvation Army, was also of opinion that the pictures had a bad effect on tho minds and consciences of young people. On tho other hand, Mr J. H. Upton, a trustee of the Mackclvie Art Gallery and an cx-Mayor of Auckland, speaking as a citizen and as the father of a family, foiled to see anything indecentin tfio pictures; in fact their exhibition served the public good by cultivating a teste for the beautiful. Mr Rntbbone, editor of tho "Graphic/’ declared that in the interest® of the public good the pictures should bo circulated ns widely as possible. He would be glad to, have such pictures where his sons and daughter could see them from the early Binge.-* of their lives. If they were hidden away, only to be shown to grown-up people, that would create a notion in the minds of children that there was something wrong about them. ‘Mr F. Earl, president of the Auckland Law Society, was even more emphatic in favour of tho pictures. Ho said: "X would not know any man or woman—absolutely would not know them—who could see any impurity or impropriety in those two pictures. I would not have such a person about my premises-, I would not have him in my hack yard." Sergeant Hendry: "Would you take them into the public school and show them indiscriminately f” Witness: "Could any young man soy that this is an indecent' picture or suggest an impure thought ? Do you think so yourself, sorgoant t” Sergeant Hendry: "X am not expressing an opinion." (laughter.) Mr F. H. Pickering, J. P.. a married, man with several grown-up dnughtv.;agreed that i the pictures of "I’s-obi , , were not indecent, and said it wonld ' - a good thing if the pictures vere exhibited more. To Sergeant Hcnlry: 7The indiscriminate sale of postcards in afpuh lie, street would not bo an act of in* decency. . . He admitted, however, he would not send such a past-card to a, young girl. Mr Kettle: -Why not ?—V do not know. Perhaps I am too old, (Laughter.) Sorgoant Hendry: iwonm.it be a proper thing for a young boy to send a post-card of "Psycho” to a girl ? —I cannot say, I have seen ladies painting pictures in the public galleries at Florence which were a good deal worse than these. I have a worse one hanging up in my own drawing-room. "To the pure all things are fiuro." paid Canon Nelson (in charge of St, Paul’s parish), in answer to a question b» Sergeant Hendry. Tho Rev. W. H, Wilson agreed that there was no harm in exhibiting the pictures. Mr J. K. Ivnecu, secretary of tho Seamen's Union, and a member of the Auckland Harbour Board, told tho Court that tho Maori® had carvings that were done before , tho arrival of the pnkeba that might now be considered indecent if these pictures were. Such pictures should bo exliibitod in tho public schools. Mr Edward Bartley, architect, and. a member of the ad. vi'sory hoard at the Art Gallery, stated that since the prosecutions hod commonoed people .had been looking for indecent pictures. Tho caretaker at the Art Galiorv had told him that when people visited the gallery they asked him if he was a married man, and how could they expect to bring their sons and daughter® into the Art Gallery when some of th* statues and pictures were exposed. They had pictures in the Art Gallery a good deni‘worse than Psyche.