“QUEEN OF TBE SEA."

Hokitika Guardian, 27 June 1919, Page 4

“QUEEN OF TBE SEA."

SCENE FROM A EH'.VI OBJECTED TO. CHARGE AGAINST PICTURE theatre manager. AUCKLAND, filin' 2a. When the picture entitled “Queen of the Sen” in which Annette Kellennan takes the principal part, was heino exhibited in -May last a card depicting a scene from the film, showing a number of girls, scantily clad, representing sirens on the seashore, was displayed in a passage-way of the theatre for advertising purposes. In consequence, the manager of the theatre, Robert Lois I Cl el a nd, was charged before Air J. Iv. J Wilson, S.M., at the Police Court toj day with having publicly exhibited an indecent photogravure in a public* place. Sub-Th.spec tor AYohlrmvnn said that on May loth, he saw (lirco copies of the card in the passage leading into (lie theatre. Some people, from youths lo middle age, were looking at them, lie I old defendant that objection had been raised to the pictures. Witness said lie would like a copy, bul dofeudanl replied that they were not his property and lie could not part with them with out instructions. Tie said the cards represented a portion of the screen that had been cut out of the film by the censor. Defendant said lie did not think there was anything objectionable in Hie he would not have exposed Ilium lo tln. public view. Tlie run of Hie Ii lin at (he (heatre had just expired, and it was going (o Napier. Defendant said he would undertake that the portion objected to would not be exhibited Jigniu. Next morning defendant handed n constable one of the cards. .Mr Skelton contended that the pnsI sage-way was not a public place, and

iliat the scene ou the card was not inlecent. Tlie card was a representation if a part of the film and tlie film was passed by the censor. He was expressly emphasising that point , for l here must he a mistake in the Sub-In-spector’s evidence. The operator would fell the Court the same scene appeared in the film. The Magistrate: The impression tin’s picture gives one is that the lady on the light is nude. lam not at all sure that such ti picture should he allowed to be exhibited to tile general public. Air Skelton contended that a merely nude figure was not indecent, and mentioned such pictures as “The Bath of Psyche”, and “Psyche at Nature’s Mirror.” He referred to similar prosecutions that took place in Auckland some years ago regarding such pictures and said they were dismissed by the late Air C. C. Kettle, S.AI. Continuing, Air Skelton said the picture was passed by the censor, and his certificate was duly attached to it. If it was hold to lie indecent, it would be a grave censure of the censor. The defendant said Ii is caretaker put the cards in the passageway, and he did not know they were there till the Sub-Inspector called. lie did not tell the Sub-Inspector that the scene had been deleted by the censor. Ho told him that the scene was in the picture but he could not say whether the particular figure to which exception had been taken was included. He had received no complaints about the picture except this one. The case was adjourned sine die for further evidence.