IS THE BARD BLUE?

NZ Truth, Issue 173, 10 October 1908, Page 5

IS THE BARD BLUE?

BILL SHAKESPEARE BEFORE THE CHRIBTCHUBCH COURT.

Is " Venus and Adonis " Immoral ?

JAY PEES SAY THE PAIR ARE PURE.

The Puritanical Prosecutions m the Holy City.

i The absurdity of the Offensive Publications Act, or of New Zealand's interpretation of it, was evidenced m the recent prosecutions of booksellers m Christchurch, which culminated ., m an action brought by the booksellers against themselves, to determine whether they were running a risk m keeping Shakespeare's works on their shelves. This country is getting so r 'good" that a special license will be necessary, presently, to enable a bloke to take his best girl down by the Avon of an evening. In the casg against Frank Harold Simpson, of Simpson and Williams, charged with selling Victoria Cross's two books, "Five Mights" and "Six Women," Oscar Alpers made some interesting remarks. Sale of the books was admitted, also full knowledge of,. the. contents, but it was contended that foe publications were not immoral. In the two books especially "six women, •" were ditrerent ( from "The Yoke," U book which had formed the subject of a previous con- , viction. With fine satire, Alpers remark- ., cd that Solicitor Salter. (prominent, m the V.M.0.A.) had acknowledged "The Yoke" to be immoral. "It is absurd to say it is not so alter that admission" observed Alpers, > AND THE COURT GRINNED. One of the books was comprised' of six short stories, and he assumed that the prosecution was base^ , upon the- first story, which -he contended was not immoral, Neither was it moral, but was m the nature of a work of art. Counsel contended 'that the only immoral character m the story was the "virtuous" wife who^ married a man and for iip•war<ts of twenty years subjected him to sexual starvation. The mdral of the book was good, "The .Five Nights" was not a book supporting the social order of marriage, representing, , as it did, a ,man who had an intrigue with another woman, but counsel contended the effect of the novel was to • enforce a : respect for the marriage contract asY it existed. Neither of. the bootes was subversive of the existing order of morality, and he held that, the. moral sense of the. com-i munity was to; be gauged, by the average respectable citizen's library. This waV not complete without an' unexpurgated edition of Shakesneare's works • Magistrate ; Bishop preferred not to hear anyw*ng. about Shakespeare's works, which he understood would . shbrin ly form the subject of a prosecution. Mr Alpers saih he would avoid allusion to the particular work which wa» to form the subject of prosecution. He con-, tended that there were m Shakespeare's ' works passages luxuriant with Oriental sensuality, although the fact might be defended on the score that Shakespeare was a classic/That argument didn't apply to authors like Peilaing, Smollett, and Sterne, whose books reeked with allegedly- indecent matter. , Magistrate Bishop said he had always understood , those, books were classics^ Mr Alpers contended ., that the -only reason why "Five Nights" and "SiivWomen" were not regarded as classics Vas that they, were hot sufficiently I .' old, Feilding and. Smollett, V SPOKE OF LEWD SUBJECTS, and counsel held it coulhn't be argued that because they were upwards of 200 years old therefore they were not immoral. ; The average citizen didn't *- think it improper to read books that dealt frankly with human passion, which was r not an immoral, thing. v . As already recorded, ; a conviction was recorded -m this case. These convictions have greatly alarmed booksellers throughout New Zealand who might be liable to prosecution ' for' selling any classic, not ' excluding the Bible, so. it was determined m <Christ-, church by the booksellers to proceed against themselves to arrive at a der cision as to whether Shakespeare's impolite poem "Venus and Adonis" -wis, a lawful book to have on. the !" shelves. Whitcombe and Tomb's offered themselves for slaughter on the sacrificial altar of the trade, George Hawkes Whitcombe, managing-. director, being the person charged. Perhaps no better method could .have been selected to show up the absurdity of the puritanical push's, crusade against alleged immoraft literature in' New Zealand. . Oscar Alpers appeared to prosecute, and Lawyer Wright defended. The. prosecuting counsel contended that the Offensive Publications Act' was merely intended to deal with immoral advertisements and with the affixing of immoral matter to some standing object, and it was desired that a conviction should direct the attention of the public and the Legislature to this fact, to effect an amendment of the I Act. With singular sarcasm, Mr Alpers described "Venus and Adonis" as an extremely lewd poem. He outlined the

I story of the Goddess of Love wooing a reluctant man and indulging m the MOST SUGGESTIVE LANGUAGE AND v GESTURES. It was not a book that a man would give to his daughter, and because it was written by Shakespeare and not by Victoria Cross, and might be regarded as a classic; the fact remained that it was dirt, even' though it was old dirt. Mr Wright admitted sale of the book, and stated that the prosecution bad been instituted to show the absurdity of applying existing legislation dealing with indecency to the literature of. New Zealand. The Offensive Publications Act wa« really passed m England to deal with offensive 'advertisements relating to quack nostrums for sexual diseases, and "printed matter" m the Act Was confined to that class of publication. Al-. though the Act had been m force m England fox a number of years there had been no prosecution m respect of any. "book," although a book might be classified as printed matter. He contended that tiie recent prosecutions m the Magistrate's Court should have been instituted m the Supreme Court under the Criminal Code of New Zealand, • which covered obscene, or grossly offensive books, and the §.M. Court's powers pertained merely to the sexual advertisements and leafllets that he had already; spoien of. .>'•.■.,' •■•..':.'■ HE CHARACTERISED AS INTOLERABLE! . i the law of 1905 which threw. upon the bookseller the onus of proving 1 , not only - that he didn't know the character of the books he was selling, but also that he Had no reasonable means of knowing. If was hoped, that the law; would .be air tered. It Was physically impossible for ~ Whitcdmbe to be aware of ( the ccm tents of the thousands of. books on his shelves. ; and counsel alluded to the . absurdity of the Act if it had reference to such classics as the "Decameron of Boccaccio-, the "Hepcameron," &c. They were . ■ accepted .for sale by all booksellers. 'He contended that it was absurd to ■- take / as a test for a book, "Would a father place it m the hands of a girl of ' I*s or 16 ?" for such a- test would clear tba library of from 25 to '50 per cent. of books by English authors. Araeng books that might be considered objectionable were " "'Westward Ho !" "Sir Richard Calmady." and Balzac's "The Wild. Ass's Shiit'.?' Because, a man might have books m his library which he wouldn't place m the haads pf ; his daughter he might, under the present law, be liable to prosecution; (for distributing immoral literature by lending a volume to a friend. The case was heard before J.'sP. N«at« and Aiken, who probably know as muoti about Shakespeare as a cow knows about Euclid, but they gave a sensible decision when they dismissed the case.

Judgment -wasjiyettin tbs OJtiristohutcb S.M. Court on Tuesday m, cases taken . against "booksellers for selling- novel* Ilka . "Anna Lombara," "The Yoto," "Fi™ ■Nights," and "Six Women." Macistaat*Bishop, didn't propose to say mvuep. ak<»«rt the decisions as a -whale ; {this sooner tha whole thing > was buried and forgotten the better for the community.' He couldn't bringj himself to believe that prosecutions of this ria-ture : and" against such "as thf present defendants, could possibly resuH m any real benefit,' although : he didn't desire to question the motives which at> tuated the prosecutions. Speaking gener< ally, it might be fcafeiy laid down, that where it was believed , that an offence against the ilaw had been commit- . ted, a prosecution was not only justifi-f able hut often times necessary. He was strongly of opinion that m ■these cases, having regard to THE CHARACTER AND STANDING OF DEFENDANTS, a warning would have been sufficient to cause all respectable booksellers to cease selling the books objected to and we should .then have been spared proceedings which would most certainly have the effect of attracting public attention to matters that were better buried put of sight. The issue he had to decide was a very simple one. Were v these hoots printed matter of an ■• immoral nature within the meaning of the Police Offences Act, 1908 ? Having regard io all circumstances, his Worship was. bound to say that,, m his -opinion, the books were of an immoral nature. True, it was that this opinion was only that of an individual and possibly very falliklo, but he : believed- i it to be ah opinion which, considered calmly and dispassionately and altogether apart from the question of a.' quasi-criminal prosecution, would be endorsed by all > decent and bes*-iisj»Sed minds m the community. H« ! agreed that the books were of varyifig degrees «f immorality, .but the immorality was * m each one, and if they took cut tha immorality there was nothing else lolt for. , any reader to give the books .a socond thought. His Worship, to strangthea his opinion, quoted the words of Ch^* Jus " tice Cockburn m Rejina v. HiciMa ;— "It is perfectly true there are i fireStf many publications ©t high repute In the Hterary productions of this couirtry tho. tendency of wfiich is immodest, aud,. If , you please, immoral, and possibly there mij»ht have been subject matter far indictment m many of the whiles which have been referred to. But it is not to be said, because there are m many standard and established works objectionable passages that, therefore, the law is not as alleged on the part of this prosecution, namely, that obscene works are the - subject matter of indictment, and I think the test of obscenity is this, whather the tendency of the matter charged as ob-; scenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open TO SUCH IMMORAL INFLUENCES, and into-, whose hands a publication ol this sort may fall.. Now, with regard to this work, it is quite certain it would suggest to the minds of the young ■ of either sex, or even to persons of more advanced years, thoughts of a most impure and libidioous character." Supplementing this, Magistrate Bishop suggested to those who advocated and defended extreme license m the character of modern literature, for more or less extraordinary reasons , that they should pause, and read and thoroughly consider the above words of an eminent judge, however lightly they might regard his - Worship's personal opinions. As regards the three booksellers' assistants, Christian, Rankin, and Sherwin, he was bound to convict them. The sales by them of the various hooks had been admitted and proved, and their remarks to the purchasers at the time of the sales proved conclusively to his Worship's mind that they knew the quality of the books and that they were different to the ordinary class. If this were not so, he would probably have taken a different view of their actions. Each was fined 40s and ordered to. pay the costs. In the cases of • Whitcombe, Williams, and Fountain Barber, after mature consideration, ha had decided that he OUGHT NQT TO RECORD CONVICTIONS. The exigencies of the position appeared to have been fully met by the conviction of their assistants^ He re3d. say nothing further than that the charges were dismissed.