HC Deb 17 March 1964 vol 691 cc1167-8
14. Mr. D. Foot

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when "The Perfumed Garden", a translation by Sir Richard Burton, was placed upon the list of books prohibited to be imported; by whom the decision was taken; how many copies were seized by the Customs authorities; when this book was removed from the prohibited list; and how many copies have been returned to their owners.

Mr. Maurice Macmillan

For many years this book was liable to be seized by Customs officers as obscene on the instructions of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise. Four copies have been seized in the last two years. After the book was published in this country revised instructions were sent to Customs officers early in February. Before the instructions arrived one further copy of a British edition was detained by mistake on 1st February last. This copy was returned to the traveller. The four copies previously seized have not been restored to their original owners, but no further copies have been held.

Mr. Foot

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I purchased a copy of this book at London Airport, when I was leaving the country last December, but that when I returned to London Airport in January it was seized by a Customs officer and returned to me a few days later? Is it not a sheer absurdity that the Customs should prevent the importation of a book which can be purchased freely by anybody at any bookstall in this country? Is the attitude of the Government that of an official in one of Evelyn Waugh's early novels: that even if we cannot stop literature being produced in this country at least we can stop it coming in from outside?

Mr. Macmillan

I deeply regret that it should have been the hon. and learned Gentleman who was inconvenienced in this way. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] I said in my original reply that the further copy was seized by mistake. This situation arose from a slight difference in definition between the duty imposed upon the Customs under the Customs Consolidation Act and the Customs and Excise Act, 1952, and the definition of obscenity in the Obscene Publications Act, 1959. The Government take the view, shared by the hon. and learned Gentleman, that it is ridiculous to seize books which are published in this country or likely to be published in this country without prosecution. That is why revised instructions were sent to the Customs officers. I regret that the process of transmission was overtaken by the speed with which the company concerned managed to produce their English edition.