AMENDMENT REPORTED. (Hansard, 9 July 1857)

LORD CAMPBELL

said, that, in bringing up the Report, he hoped their Lordships would allow him to make a few observations on this subject. Since he last addressed them he had received information of a most appalling nature, with regard to the sale of these publications; but many of the communications were such that, for decency sake, he would not dwell upon them. But he held in his hand a volume which would give their Lordships a notion of what was going forward. It was a translation of one of the novels of Dumas the younger, on which the opera of La Traviata was founded, and it was called The Lady of the Camellias. It gave a description of the white camellia and the red camellia, in a manner which trenched upon modesty, and which he could not state. He did not wish to create a category of offences in which this hook might be included, although it certainly was of a polluting character. It was only from the force of public opinion and of an improved taste that the circulation of such works could be put a stop to; but he was glad to inform their Lordships that there was a Society for the Encouragement of Pure Literature, of which his noble Friend the Duke of Argyll was president. He was shocked to think that there should be so much circulation for works like the one in his hand—The Lady of the Camellias. In this work the lady described her red camellias and her white camellias; but he would not shock their Lordships by going further. He had heard on good authority that the book was sold at all the railway stations. In it were thirty-two pages of book advertisements, embracing about 100 publications, most of which were of a very abominable description indeed. He referred to a particular portion of the novel in question as a specimen of the mode in which it overstepped the bounds of modesty and propriety. His Lordship then referred to another work of 1153 a character still worse than the former. He would not mention the name of this book, as that, no doubt, would be highly gratifying to the publisher, and would promote its sale. But whenever the work had been brought before a jury, which had been done on several occasions, there had been no hesitation felt by the juries in declaring that its obscenity was such as ought to be punished. He believed there were as many as a hundred of these filthy publications for sale in Holywell Street, many of which were of a most disgusting character. In the advertisement of one of these works it was stated to be "illustrated with numerous coloured engravings" and added, "This work has had many imitators, but no rivals. It may be said that for beauty of description it stands without a rival." Formerly this work was sold at the price of one guinea, but it was now published at 3s. 6d. In Holywell Street there were many shops of the same description as that which published the books of which he had been speaking. He thought that the issue of such publications should be made a misdemeanour. What was the remedy for all this, and how was the evidence to be procured? He suggested that there should be a power given, on complaint being made, to institute a search in places supposed to be depots for these publications, and if found they should be carried away and destroyed. A more stringent measure might have been introduced, but he would not ask their Lordships to do more than pass this Bill with its single operative clause, which was to allow, on complaint being made by a party who believed that works of this nature were kept for the purpose of sale, a warrant to be granted for a constable to go with such assistance as might be necessary and accompanied by the party making the complaint, and if these indecent publications were found that they might be carried away and burnt or otherwise destroyed. He thought it should be left to the Judge to say what was and what was not an obscene publication.