HC Deb 18 February 1957 vol 565 cc166-76

Motion made and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. R. Thompson.]

10.9 p.m.

Mr. Denis Howell (Birmingham, All Saints)

I wish to raise a question of the censorship of literary works imported into this country. This matter arises because of the seizure by the Customs and Excise authority of two volumes by Jean Genet, a contemporary French author, irrespective of the fact that copies of these works already lie in the British Museum and in the Library of Reading University. It strikes me as extremely illogical that the Customs and Excise refused to allow this book, which is in French and could be read only by a very limited number of French scholars, from proceeding to the reference library of Birmingham University, although it is already in the other two libraries to which I have referred.

I know that there are conflicting opinions about this author and his work. Some people think he is extremely mediocre, some think nothing of him at all. On the other hand, there are people of literary standing who believe him to be a man of genius. I certainly would not express any opinion, not having read his works, but it is mostly on a matter of principle that I raise this question tonight. I am assured by all the authorities, whatever view they take, that to anyone—especially a scholar wanting to study French literature—this man is an author who must be read. If he must be read to get a proper appreciation of contemporary French literature, I submit to the Parliamentary Secretary that it is rather serious that libraries in this country should be prevented from having his works in their reference sections.

I hope very much that, on classical grounds, if on no others, the Economic Secretary, who had such a distinguished classical history before coming to this House, will be tempted to support us. I cannot believe that anyone with such a record as he has could oppose classical French scholars having an opportunity to study the works of Jean Genet. Incidentally, a full critical analysis of this author appeared in the British Journal of Delinquency, in which there is a four-page review of this man and his works. Obviously he is a man of outstanding importance in this field. That review has been written by Mr. John Croft who, I believe, happens to be an official of the Home Office. If this author and his contemporary standards are sufficiently important to be reviewed by a member of the Home Office staff, I submit in passing that that is another excellent reason why the Customs and Excise ought not to take the action they have taken.

When this question first arose there was much feeling about it in Birmingham. Leading articles appeared in two very responsible newspapers, the Birmingham Post and the Birmingham Mail, opposing censorship of these works. Since then, there has been some change of face. We have had the almost Gilbertian situation of the town clerk of Birmingham, the city librarian and the chairman of the committee, solemnly proceeding to London. The Customs and Excise authorities gave them translated passages from these works, a practice to which I must object, because I think it is quite impossible to judge any book by a few translated passages. Then they proceeded back to Birmingham with those passages, having decided that the book is unfit for the rest of it to read. That solemn procession came home with those passages and one could almost hear them singing Gilbert's famous song: I have a little list. It is rather like the old story we used to tell in local government circles of the mayor and town clerk who watched a film through three times before deciding that it was unfit for public exhibition. That seems to be the position in Birmingham as a great many people in Birmingham appear to know what is contained in those passages, especially in official circles, although I have not had the opportunity of reading them.

It is a question of principle which I raise tonight, apart from the specific issue, for it is wrong that the Customs and Excise should use an authority given them in the latter part of the nineteenth century to stop a classical work from being imported into the country, especially a classical work of this character which can be read by only a limited number of people and which is already in existence in the British Museum and the Library of the Reading University. It is wrong that they should use that authority to prevent it from being contained in the Birmingham reference library or any other reference library, particularly after it has had a favourable review in The Times.

Libraries are responsible in law for proper discretion in these matters, and they exercise it. I am told that there is hardly any reference library in the country which, for the benefit of classical scholars and students, do not contain works which, if put on sale, might be described as pornographic; but that does not prevent them from being in the collection of these libraries as very necessary for students of particular periods of literature. In other words, the exercise of this authority is an abuse of the powers of the Customs and Excise.

The information which the Economic Secretary kindly gave me when I asked a Question shows that the practice of censoring this sort of book is growing considerably. In 1955, 827 books and magazines were so prevented from entering the country. Is it a fact that the British Museum, for example, can get pretty well any book it wants? There is a feeling in some literary circles that because of its close Government connections it can order and obtain those books and put them in its libraries. Personally I think that is perfectly proper, and hope nothing I say will alter that custom in respect of the British Museum. Rather, I hope it will be extended to other libraries.

If those books cannot be brought into the country, I must ask the Economic Secretary how they got into Reading University Library and why there should be any distinction between Reading University Library and any other university library or city reference library in the country.

I am also told upon inquiries from some booksellers that they have now reached the position that they find it impossible to get any of this author's work into the country, whether pornographic or not. Is that true? If it is true, it means that in respect of this author there is an index system at work. This is a very serious matter, far beyond anything we have previously heard. It means that this author's works are not to be judged on their individual merits, but that the fact that he has written anything stops its importation. That is a very serious matter.

These books were written in French and are widely read, particularly throughout Europe and America, by students of contemporary French literature. It seems to me farcical that students in this country are prevented from reading what is read by students throughout the world, and particularly in Europe and America.

Could the Economic Secretary be far more explicit than I realise he could be at Question Time about the principles which govern the Customs and Excise in this matter? Who decides which books shall come in? No one can conceivably believe that every book imported into this country is read by a member of the Customs and Excise staff. That would be a fantastic state of affairs which obviously does not exist. Is there a hit-and-miss method by Customs and Excise? Do they wait for a complaint about a particular book? As we have here a public authority exercising its powers of censorship. It is extremely important, whether we agree with it or not, that we should know the principles upon which it operates. Apart from the amount of public money involved in this sort of censorship, I think we are entitled to a reply to that question.

I want to give the Economic Secretary as much time as possible in which to reply, and I hope that I have made the position quite clear. This book is already in existence elsewhere and should be in the Birmingham reference library for the use of French-speaking students. Indeed, it should be in other reference libraries. I know that there are difficulties, but I certainly do not think that Birmingham can judge of the quality of a work by certain extracts from it. Such a practice is to be deprecated.

The great difficulty about this Act of 1876 in relation to contemporary opinion is that the Government, by standing by that Act, are saying, in effect, that they do not think the public are capable of responsible judgment in regard to this or any other work. I believe that we have as responsible and mature a public as can be found anywhere in the world. Our people should be trusted to do their own censorship. I, for one, trust them to sort out for themselves what is right and what is wrong.

No one suggests that we shall corrupt thousands of people by having such books in the reference libraries, and I hope very sincerely that the Government will agree that our people should be treated as being responsible, and not as the people of Birmingham are being treated in this case —subjected to two censorships; one by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise, and another by the chairman and officials of the Birmingham Libraries Committee.

A serious principle is involved. It is true that not many people are affected. I doubt whether there are more than 25 or 30 students of French in Birmingham who want to read the book. I do not read French myself, but I understand that this is a very difficult book to read. Therefore, there are not great numbers of people involved, but this is a matter of some principle, which the Government ought to consider in a more enlightened manner and on which they should certainly give far more information than we now have at our disposal.

10.23 p.m.

Mr. James Simmons (Brierley Hill)

For three years I was chairman of the Birmingham Libraries Committee. An important point to remember is that the Birmingham Reference Library is perhaps the finest of its kind in the country, apart from the university libraries, and Birmingham is a university city. If we start censoring such books on the lines on which this censorship has been conducted the reference library will be emasculated, because this is not the only book in it that could be described as pornographic.

What must be made quite clear to the public—because prejudice is being stirred up—is that this book is not intended for public circulation through the lending library. It is intended solely for the city's reference library. I ask the Economic Secretary to bear in mind that Birmingham's reference library has a great reputation throughout the country and that the books in it are books for students. The books in the lending library are quite a different matter. If we allow this censorship to start there is no knowing where it will end, and it will gravely impair the value of the services rendered to Birmingham's students by the city's reference library.

10.24 p.m.

Mr. Eric Fletcher (Islington, East)

I am not a Birmingham Member, but I am sure the whole House is indebted to my hon. Friend for raising this question, involving, as it does, a most serious matter of principle. We in this House are against censorship of any kind, but this seems to be a most insidious form of censorship—censorship by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise.

I can understand the ordinary censorship of pornographic literature. But here we have the city corporation of Birmingham wishing to import for its reference library a classical work which is available in the British Museum and elsewhere. It shocks my conscience that Her Majesty's Customs and Excise can prohibit the importation of this book. I hope that the Financial Secretary will apologise on behalf of the Government for what has been, in my view, an abuse of power, and he owes it to the House and to the country to explain on what principles it has been exercised.

I have had occasion in the past to complain about Her Majesty's Customs and Excise exceeding their authority. I do not believe that, by the Act of 1876, Parliament ever intended to give the Commissioners of Customs and Excise power to prevent works of scholarship being imported into this country. I can understand there being a case as regards the importation of pornographic magazines and weekly papers and that sort of thing, but this is a work of scholarship. It seems to me quite intolerable that the Commissioners should even think that they have the right to assume these powers to prevent a great municipality from importing books in a foreign language, books of acknowledged scholarship, which people interested in the subject wish to read. I hope that the Financial Secretary will apologise for what I think, most people, on reflection, would regard as having been a very considerable abuse of power by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise.

10.27 p.m.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. J. Enoch Powell)

The hon. Member for Birmingham. All Saints (Mr. D. Howell), who introduced the topic, and I are in some difficulty because, of course, we are debating this matter on the Adjournment and therefore have to take the law of the country as it stands. The law of the country governing this matter, as he said, is the Act of 1876, which prohibits the importation into this country of indecent or obscene … books. I am quoting only the relevant words.

What are indecent or obscene books for the purposes of the law is not a matter to be decided by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise. It is a matter, like all other matters of the interpretation of the law, to be decided by the courts. Accordingly, the Customs and Excise Act, 1952, provides the procedure, in the Seventh Schedule, whereby the jurisdiction of the courts may be brought to bear upon this question of the interpretation of the law; for, when the Customs seize a book under this provision, they must give notice to the importer and the importer has the right, upon receiving that notice, within a month to make a claim. Thereupon the matter must be referred to the courts. Normally, it is referred to the magistrates' courts but there is provision for it to be taken to the High Court.

Thus, although the day-to-day administration of this Section, as, indeed, the administration of all other prohibitions and regulations of import into this country, is administered by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise, the decision in the last resort as to what does or does not fall within its compass is for the courts.

Having explained the procedure, I will come to the particular case. These two volumes were imported into this country in October. The officers at the point of import, after examining them, referred the volumes to headquarters. Headquarters, after examination, considered that they fell within the ambit of the prohibition in the law, and accordingly gave notice to the importer, Messrs. Blackwell, that the importer might, if he thought fit, make a claim that the books were not, within the meaning of the Act, indecent or obscene.

The importer made no claim. I do not know whether, during the period of one month, t he importer sought the opinion or consulted the wishes of the City authorities for whom the books were being imported. It is reasonable to suppose, at any rate, that the authorities were aware of the facts and of their rights. However, the opportunity which was open in this case, as in all cases, to test the matter in a court of law, was not taken, although there was every chance to do so, and I may add that, as I mentioned in answering the hon. Member's question a week or two ago, Her Majesty's Customs and Excise are very ready, even though the legally provided period has elapsed, to arrange for a test importation so that even now, if desired, the matter can be referred to the courts.

However, the Birmingham authorities did think it their duty to form their own opinion of the interpretation—though it was not referred to the courts in the circumstances which I have explained—which had been put upon the law, and there occurred what the hon. Member for All Saints described as a solemn procession from Birmingham to the Metropolis and back again. But, of course, the fact that the solemn procession included the town clerk, the city librarian and the chairman of the libraries committee—the three people most interested, one must assume, in the completeness and status of the city collection—does give the procedure a certain importance, and what they said a certain evidential value.

After that visit the chairman of the public libraries committee said: When I had the opportunity of reading translated passages from page after page of Genet's book I felt sick to the foundations of my being. The theme was homosexuality. I am convinced that the Customs and Excise Department has rendered a public service in impounding such a book. He is the chairman of the public libraries committee, charged as such with the duty of looking after the interests of the city reference library, and it is reasonable to suppose that that opinion which he expressed was a considered opinion and one given after consultation with the others who had accompanied him to London.

Mr. D. Howell

It certainly was not an opinion given after consultation with the libraries committee. It was given before the libraries committee had an opportunity of reading the book. As the chairman cannot usurp the functions of the other 151 members of the city council, would the Financial Secretary agree that the other 151 members of the city council should have the same opportunity of reading the same extract?

Mr. Powell

That is a matter for the libraries committee and the council them- selves to decide. One is entitled to attach importance to the statements of the chairman of the libraries committee in circumstances like that, after so much trouble had been taken by him and by the other authorities to acquaint themselves with the facts.

Mr. Howell

Why was it imported?

Mr. Powell

After discovering that the importation of this book was in fact illegal, and after deciding, as we must assume, that if tested in a court of law it would be found that the importation was illegal, they decided to take no further action. I must remind the House that we are discussing the administration of the law as it stands. I think there can be no doubt that, as the law stands, those who imported this book and those for whom it was imported had no reasonable doubt that the importation was unlawful.

The hon. Member said that there are already two copies of this book known to be in this country. I do not think it could possibly be argued that even if this does mean that two copies have already, in contravention of the law, entered the country, that is a ground on which the Customs and Excise thereafter should cease to do their duty under the law. One really cannot argue that because some contraband enters the country, therefore there should be no control of contraband at all and no effort to enforce the law.

The hon. Member asked me to state—and I will certainly ascertain this and communicate with him—whether there are any special privileges in this matter attaching under any circumstances to the British Museum. As at present advised, I am not aware that there are, but I will verify that and communicate with him.

He asked whether this action means that this author's works will automatically be regarded as indecent and obscene, and the answer to that is "No". Each case must be taken on its merits. If other works—for example, the hon. Member referred to Volume I, which was reviewed in The Times—are sought to be imported into this country, then an opinion on their merit will have to be formed, and there will again be an opportunity to the importer of having the matter properly settled in the courts.

I think that the House must conclude that, working within the framework of the existing law—and that is all we are able to do—in this case the Customs and Excise have interpreted that law reasonably and that, generally speaking, there is due opportunity for the public to be protected against an unreasonable administrative application of the law.

Mr. Howell

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for what he said about a general ban on this author's works. In view of what he has said, would he make inquiries from the Customs and Excise, for it seems impossible to get any bookseller to import any of this author's works, whether they are pornographic or not.

Mr. Powell

The Customs and Excise are not responsible for what a bookseller is willing to put on order. They are responsible only for the administering of the law relating to importation.

I would claim that the position at present is exactly that which was desiderated in a leading article in The Times on 27th December, which posed the very real difficulties of this matter—that there is a tremendous amount of literature which everyone would wish to prevent from entering the country, while, on the other hand, we do not want a stuffy and unduly narrow attitude to the matter to grow up or to be enforced—and came to the conclusion that the only answer is the constant challenging of each disputable exercise of censorship. Authority must be forced to stand and deliver justification. I submit to the House that the procedure which I have explained provides just that. It obliges Her Majesty's Customs and Excise, in the application of the law, to submit themselves upon challenge to the judgment of the courts, which is the right tribunal for the interpretation of the law.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-two minutes to Eleven o'clock.