NOXIOUS PRINTS BILL

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 873, 20 July 1910, Page 8

NOXIOUS PRINTS BILL

IN THE COUNCIL. A CANTERBURY LAND QUESTION. PREPARING FOR THE BUDGET .DEBATE. VIEWS OF .MR! MASSEY. , . In tho Legislative. Council i yesterday tho Indecent Publications Bill was read I a second time and referred to the Statutes' Revision Committee. - The House was occupied in the afternoonwith the adjourned debate on the report of the commission which was appointed to'- report on the Mackenzie Country runs. In'the evening the Prime Minister read the Budget in the presence of crowded galleries, and after a brief discussion as- to the order of business for the next few days, the House adjourned until this afternoon. ■ . •■ THE COUNCIL. THE LATE MR. R. HOBBS. When the Legislative Council reBumed yesterday afternoon, .'The,Hon.-Dr..FINDLAY moved;that the Council record its high sense of the faithful'services rendered to New Zealand by the :late Mr. Richard Hobbs, formerly' a member of the House of Representatives, and the loss.sustained by tho Dominion by his death, and respectfully tendered to. his relatives - its sincere sympathy in their; , bereavement. Dr. , Findlay stated that the late. Mr. Hobbs was the author of the Gaming Act; and showed the utmost sympathy ■with that anti-gambling spirit .that, was to : day animating so largely the people of' Now Zealand:. The Hon. 0. SAMUEL-. (Taranaki) also' referred to the services and. high character of the,' late Mr. Hobbs, and the motion /was carried unanimously. INDECENT PUBLICATIONS BILL. .'. SECOND READING GARBLED. ■ The debatu on the second reading-of the Indecent Publications Bill w'as then .continued.' • .. ' ' .' Tho Hon. G. JONES (Otago) urged that many imported hooks were of such a'character that they should never;be sold. . The; purveyors of such books should know what they . were selling. He had never in his life 'read a more filthy , book than "Anna.Lombard," recommended by . "that great moralist, W: T. Stead."' ]f there were such differences of opinion as ,to what was and was not'immoral literature, how could they leave tho question to' a policeman to: decide? '' '-.',•• ' ~ ..'.'Dr.- Findlay: Ho would come , nearer to; it than Mr;' Stead did. '.•■' •■ ."Mr. Jones urged that informations .a'nde'r; the Bill should be laid only,with the : consent : .of the Attorney-General. He concluded that the real object at. which-the Bill was aimed was a pubHca- : i.yy.as doing great harm in thisv.iCommunity.j and which was;:- iiQ.t) only, immoral,. but offensive in every other respect. He .rejoiced that ..the Bill proposed to give no appeal outside this country. The, time had come when ws should be v able to manage our own lpgal affairs. ■' He "■' did' not think that offences imder the Bill.should.be tried before : 'a'i, jury. ! 'Something should be done to' protect children who sold papers, and who might be liable under the Bill. ' ... ■-.-... The Hon. J. B, OALLAN (Otago) did not think that the Bill was too drastiu. Ho thought that if the Bill was strictly enforced it would do a great deal of good, and'}help to stamp out ". an .evil. .which- was' unfortunately.very. prevalent. He- suggested" that cases under the Bill should be conducted in court not'by the police, but by the Crown Prosecutor for the district, who would be botter able to .conbend with a skilled criminal advocate. It had been objected 'that the, imprison- , trient clause would not be operative in Vhe case of limited liability companies, and 'he suggested that in such cases tho managing director or some other prominent member should be deemed to . be the proprietor. : Useful as a Preventive. ; The Hon. H.' F.VWIGRAM (Canterbury) hoped that such a drastic measure. would not often have to he put'in operation. The Bill would proDably be chiefly'useful as a preventive.'. It seemed' to him very undesirable that the police should have power of initiation in enforcing the measure, and he hoped that the Statutes Reform Committee Would consider this point with a view "to safeguarding the public. The Hon., W. BEEHAN (Auckland) said he hoped that the Bill would not bedirected at works .of art. ' V Dr. Findlay: We leave the question .of''indecent"'statuary to tho law-as it exists now. '.'. ■ ■ Mr. Beehan condemned certain postcards imported from France.' He generally supported: the Bill, but thought that' prosecutions under it should.bo referred to the AttorneyGetiefal; • : - ■ ■ Tho Hon. A. BALDEY (Otago) doubted if the- Bill would stamp out the evil at which it; was directed. Too much power would bo given to the pblico under the Bill. Ho considered that "penny"dreadfuls" did as much harm to the youth of this country as indecent literature. Ho would-.like to seo tho Bill passed in a modified form. The/ Hon. Dr. W. E. COLLINS (Wellington) generally approved the Bill, but thought that- it would bo very hard on booksellers if, they were.to bo penalised because some of the books that were, sent out to, them, -and of which they know nothing, happened to be indecent. The Hon. C. M. LUKE (Wellington) thought .that the benefits' to bo derived from the Bill- would outweigh its disadvantages. He could not conceive of anything lnoro important than tho pro- , tection of our youth from evil literature. There were exceptions to tho general high standard of tho press in Now Zealand, to .'cope with which legislation was required. Bad Language in Streets. Tho Hon. AT. W. M'CARDLE (Auck : land) considered the Bill a most desirablo one. There was, , however, an evil that seemed to him . even more prevalent than bad literature. Passing along the city streets any hour, and almost any minute, one- would hear language and expressions usrid within tho hearing of women and children that could not bo surpassed in any publication in New Zealand. Ho had often felt inclined to knock tho users of Bitch languago into, tho gutter, and he ■was surprised that there wero not raoro prosecutions on this account. Tho Hon. J. M'GOWAN (Auckland) thought that tho Bill was too , drastic in some places. Pcoplo could not be made pure-minded by legislation, and every prosecution for indecent literature caused greater attention_ to bo drawn to it than they might think. • It would be- a good thing to insert a clause in the Bill providing that cases under it should be tried hi camera.

Tho Hon. J. BARR (Canterbury) supported the Bill. .Though bad language was often heard in Now Zealand streets, it was simply not to bo compared with,the languago heard in the largo cities-of Australia, the Old Country, thev United States, and other countries. (Hear, hear.) The Hon.C. H. MILLS (Wellington) said, ho had b.eoii inclined 'at first to think the Bill too drastic, but on further consideration he did not think so. . Great discretion would need to bo observed, however, in the administration of tho law. ' Dr. Findlay In Reply. I The Hon. Dr. FINDLAY, in replying, said that .the ooarso! vulgarity of Smollett, Sterne, 'or Defoe would shock any young "girl at any rate, who would pitch it aside as > altogether unworthy of..the training' she had received. The really dangerous books ■were those written with.a soft delicacy, which lured on the reader with the idea that the author; was" propounding his philosophy from \ the purest motives, and that- he had detected 'something wrong in the social system. Under .the guise of softness, and sophistry, vice lost its grossness, and was made alluring. The observations that had been made the. Bible were trite and common, ."and they knew ■' the answer to them; The Bible would not degrade the . morals of. any man or woniaii. It was. books like "Anna Lombard," or'the latest book of Wells, where the. subject was treated with tho .utmost delicacy, -.;.which blinded the moral sense and. caused the danger. He agreed that it'was difficult to say whether; some" books were or were not immoral, 'and. that .those .doubtful cases should not be' left to- policemen. But the question ,of motive • was made very, important under tho Bill. If he'found ii man ■selling in a .threepenny-or sixpenny edition a collection of offensive parts ;of. Shakespeare on the streets to indiscriminate buyers, " ho would not hesitate-.to prosKuiite him for selling an indecent publication. . . "• Children Who Sell Papers. V ■The .questiou-of the sale 'of papers by children .presented one. of the most difficult problerns they bad to face..There were parents who were, striving to maintain themselves and fumilms on very. scanty-means, and. they could not be blamed, for attempting to increase the family,'income;'-in this way,.'but.it was necessary to look to the moral life mid moral future of young girls who were thus employed, ,and if any houss had to permit, those.young ffirls to go on the streets-.and 'vend- certain newspapers to th.o people who bought that class ;of literature, then,. whatever might .be tbo '.'state of their homes, the State was justified.in interfering, even if it had to take some steps .which seemed more: or less harsh to the parents: He was inclined to , think * that the control :,bf informations must ;. be assumed by the Attorney-General; or some other responsible officer. Tho provisions of the Bill required 'to-be administered with the best discretion and the'■utmost", caution. Tho suggestion that' information's should .be heard •in camera 'was a dangerous one-.'. Thej must remember, how much they owed, .to the. 'priessyfor the preservation, of their .liberties; and if they with silence , what went, on in the courts a great deal would bo .done sometimes to. defeat the ends of justice. At present- the: power,, of,, prohibiting ' publication'was; given pnly-to judges,'and, in connection ■\rith.;children's ) courts. Generally speaking, theutiscrotiou of tho press could; well' be' trusted,' 'and, if discretion was. iiofc uwd, an offence would lie under tha pnisent Bill. The man. who .'would, suppress the "penny dreadful,"; which'' contained.-, no indecency,' but:, .only', an." exaggerated •■ romance, did not understand t-h'e problem with which, they'were: dealing. . ;... Views on the Censorship. '.' . .'... The.office ; pf.'censor.librorum was one of tho'.. most, difficult and delicate, to which ,any man could' devote hjimßnlf. In view'.of natural differences of .opinion, he tobli it to be the'duty of any censor, if they.', were to have a censor directly 'or "indirectly, Viis" had been suggested, to lean invariably to/the side of liberty and'not restriction; To leave if to one man—the .Attorney-General, Crown .Prosecutor, or.another —to say whether a book was bad or not would -involve great difficulties/ ;.-He had* -. virtually been tho censor-.0f..-books*in'-; the" past, as ..they had 'been ,'suuroitted. to ■ him before informations -were laid. •■.■.■Hβ.- believed that, security-and a'rational 'decision, could be obtained ; by tho Attor-ney-General., .first at his : own decision, ( ahd 'Ythen , ' 'referring the 'book to such, a, librarian-as Mr. , Wilson, of the Parliamentary. Library,, or -to' Mr. Wilson' and ■ pth.ers.' The unanimity which the Council , 'had shown on-the Bill but; reflected the unanimity of. feeling • which' .existed 'throughout the .Dominion on this question. "The Bill will not be an isolated one," concluded, Dr. Findlay,: "but'part of a general process which will see oiir'.statute-book,- sooner or later, aiming, .at _. the elevation of our morals 'and the bettering'- of our lives, as a people." 1 . , . ■ The Bill was read a. second time, and referred to the Statutes Revision' Committee. ' • ; • ■ The Council then adjourned , till Thursday ■. afternoon. . ■:....■■,.'.