LEGAL TRAVESTIES

It is unfortunate that the officers responsible for the enforcement of State and Federal statutes cannot distinguish between editorial oversight and pornographic writing. Anyone who read the current issue of the "Advocate" can scarcely fail to realize that there was no intention in any of the stories to present dirt for dirt's sake, and only had there been such an intention would the present controversy be justified.

When will the great American public learn to distinguish between the printed word as such and the spirit behind it? The failure to draw such a line was responsible for keeping "Ulysses" out of the country. It has been responsible for innumerable cases of Boston censorship. And it will be responsible time and again in the future so long as phrases are taken out of their context, deprived of their background, and thus berefit of all true significance.

The editors of the "Advocate" have taken the only step open to them under the circumstances. That they should suffer from a puritannical trait that has been the curse of American art since its earliest days is patently unjust. The zealous and alert Mr. Leahy has accomplished another in a series of travesties of law enforcement.