asanovas Heimfahrt
30 en ence e en en en chaeh a.
box 4/11
Casanova'’s Homecoming“’ has been published
openly, under the imprint of the publishers. It has
had a wide circulation. It has been extensively ad¬
vertised in responsible newspapers anl periodicals.
It has been generally reviewed bythe press. The
memorandum already submitted to the Court shows
the book has been handled by practically every
reputable department and book store in New Vork
City.
When an attempt is made to ban a book as ob¬
scene, it is well to test the public temper thereon.
If it has been accepted by the community, if it
Scorresponds with the actual feelings and demands'
of society, it should be permitted to circulate unmo¬
lested. If it has been rejected by the community,
if stealth has marked its course from publisher to
reader, then it might well offend under the law. In
reversing the conviction of the defendant in the
Mary Ware Dennett case under the Federal ob¬
scenity law (U. S. v. Mury Ware Dennett, 39 Fed.
[2d Series] 564), the United States Circuit Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as recently as
March 4, 1930, implied in its opinion that it was
largely influenced by the fact that the defendant’s
pamphlet had been openly circulated for a number
of years, had been handled by reputable agencies,
had been recommended by representative individ¬
uals, and had been generally accepted by the com¬
munity. Just so with“Casanova’s Homecoming.?
Following this philosophy the courts of this state
have legalized the following volumes attacked by
this same complainant:
Mademoiselle de Maupin,“ a book in which
the author declares that he is in favor of adultery
and indicates that every woman should be seduced.
(See Halsey v. Neie York Society, 234 N. Y. 1.)
Madeleine, a diary of a prostitute, describing
in detail abortions, pimps, venereal disease and in¬