THE 'SPECTATOR'S NOTEBOOK

Mr Justice Griffiths in granting the Oz editors bail and fixing it at E100 each plus two sureties of E100 has prevented the law from making too much of an ass of itself.

His action came too late for the Times, which had already made an ass of itself in a leading article which approved the sentences of Judge Argyle. 'The Third Generation' as the Times headlined its article is a collector's piece: a fine piece of writing, in part a well-sustained argument, and a foolish conclusion which is, in fact, a straightforward assertion which is false : "Only if he believes that explicit sexual pornography cannot produce a damaging trauma in the emotional development of children should one regard the sentences in this case as unreasonable or unfair. The law has to protect children, and can only do so by the light of the general current view of the psychology of children."

Mr Justice Griffiths, in freeing Richard Neville, James Anderson and Felix Dennis, spoke some altogether better-considered words: "It is not my function to express any concluded view on the correctness of the sentences. That is a matter for the Court of Appeal. The sentences are, however, considerably more severe than usually imposed for this type of offence. They appear to mark a shift in sentencing policy, attended by the deterrent element." What those who most excitedly approved the original sentences neglect or disregard is that the jury unanimously acquitted the three editors of the most serious charge, that they produced the ' schoolkids issue' of Oz with the intention of debauching and corrupting the morals of children and young people and with the intention of "implanting in their minds lustful desires." Mr Justice Griffiths clearly attached weight to this unanimous acquittal and also pointed out that the jury found the men guilty only by a majority of three on the other counts.

One phrase of Mr Justice Griffiths caught my eye — when he said that Judge Argyle's sentences "appear to mark a shift in sentencing policy." Sentencing policy is certainly not determined by a junior judge. Is one to assume from Mr Justice Griffith's considered remark that Judge Argyle's sentences were meted out after consultation with someone in a much more elevated j-udicial position from which 'sentencing policy' may be influenced if not determined? If Judge Argyle did seek advice, and if his sentences do mark a shift in sentencing policy, then presumably Lord Chief Justice Widgery would have been consulted.

Embargo

Now that the Press Council has upheld Miss Livia Gollancz's complaint against The Spectator for publishing Auberon Waugh's review of Lord George-Brown's autobiography early, I may say how affable and informal are the meetings of the Press Council (or was on this occasion). Due to my own carelessness I took a taxi to the Press Council offices, instead of going to the Periodical Publishers Association offices, where the meeting — or hearing — had been arranged. The result was that I was about half an hour late; a situation bad enough in itself and made worse by a request of mine that the meeting be held as early as possible. Lord Pearce and his colleagues were most pleasant in accepting my apologies.

The effect of their decision is that a publisher's request that a book be not reviewed until such and such a date now has the same sort of force as an embargo. I note with mild amusement that the Press Council's statement is itself issued in the form of a press release — complete, of course, with its own embargo. Heigh ho.

A sound conclusion?

I.find myself undecided whether the Press Council's conclusion is sound. There is undoubtedly convenience in the present arrangements; and I do not suppose for one minute that I would in practice object if books were published on Thursdays as a general rule. I would not even mind if Mondays were to be the normal publica

tion day, except that, as the Press Council puts it, 'When this happened" — i.e. Monday publication — "Sunday newspapers by long custom reviewed the book the previous day." A request not to review before such and such a date becomes an embargo which the Sunday papers by custom disregard apparently now with Press Council approval. I know of no such similar embargo.

The Press Council declares that "In reviewing books the embargo system is generally beneficial to the Press. Without it there would be a danger of lowering standards because books might be reviewed without adequate consideration." I know of no evidence to substantiate this belief. As far as The Spectator is concerned, the embargo system can be a considerable nuisance; and as far as Monday publication combined with the Sunday newspapers' customary disregard is concerned, embargo is against our interest.

An embargo of, say, a White Paper to enable newspapers to prepare their reports is obviously useful. But with books, I am far less certain than the Press Council appears to be. Embargoes are a limitation, a form of constraint designed by publishers in order to further their perfectly proper commercial interests, interests which are not necessarily identical in their regard with the interests of the press. On the whole, therefore, I am inclined to reject the Press Council's judgement. However, the Council has undoubtedly done much useful work, and its usefulness depends upon the press accepting its decisions and criticisms, even where the rationality of its judgements is not immediately apparent, and on this ground The Spectator will continue its customary practice of not reviewing books before publication day.

Sidney Robbins

Mr Brian Merrick writes the following selfexplanatory note about Sidney Robbins, his colleague at Saint Luke's College, Exeter. Robbins died suddenly at the end of last month, aged forty.

"There are many teachers around the world whose .attitude to teaching English has been profoundly influenced by the dedication and vision of Sidney Robbins. Through his conferences at Exeter on Children's Literature, through the journal Children's Literature in Education which he founded and continued to edit until his death, through articles and letters in newspapers and educatiosal journals, through day and week-end courses for teachers and for children, he spread his belief in the power of appropriate literature to inspire and enlighten: children, teachers and teaching. Above all he did possibly as much -as anyone during the last six years to make teachers and parents aware of the abundance of chil dren's literature of outstanding quality published since the last war and to draw attention to the limitations of much that has traditionally been presented as appropriate literature for children.

"The first of the conferences on 'Recent Children's Fiction and its Role in Education' was held in Exeter in 1969. The conference planned for 1971, which will be held at Saint Luke's from August 31 to September 4, has attracted as great a number of delegates and speakers as the previous conferences. Because of the thoroughness of Sidney Robbins's planning it can take place without him pre. cisely as he would have wished."