Book Banning

According to U.S.A. Confidential, people actually pay to have their books banned in Massachusetts. Supposedly there is no irony in the statement. But the recent action by the State Commissioner of Public Safety is suspicious in another way. He warned book sellers in the state that if they sell U.S.A. Confidential, they would be held responsible for any libel and obscenity suits. Immediately after this "advice," virtually every store in Massachusetts hastily withdrew the book and tucked it away.

Technically, the Commissioner of Public Safety has no legal power to give such "advice." First, any libel action would be civil suit and therefore, unless the state were a plaintiff, outside its jurisdiction. Secondly, if the state did file a bill of equity, the action would have to come through the office of the Attorney General.

Although the Attorney General can bring legal action, there is no statute which states that he has to advise booksellers of a book's libelousness. And while it can be argued that the Attorney General is performing valuable public service by forewarning booksellers, the state has never taken upon itself to warn of other possibly libelous matter, such as the syndicated Chicago Tribune articles on "reds at Harvard."

Governor Dever has disclaimed any participation in the affair; he has pointed out that the safety commissioner's warning was "just advice" and in no way constituted banning or suppression. Dever may be entirely correct and the commissioner's action may have been a public service; yet the libel laws themselves prevent such "advice" by either the commissioner or the attorney general to be dismissed as suggestions which would have no bearing on any further jurisprudence.

Under the existing laws the bookseller is held responsible for any libelous matter in a book he sold, and if a suit were brought, the seemingly innocent "advice" by the commissioner could be--and doubtless would be--considered prima facie evidence against the bookseller. On the evidence that the bookseller had been warned of a book's libelousness, the court could judge him guilty. Such subtle suppression is dangerous the bookseller cannot read all books and therefore must depend on the state for advice. In so doing, however, the seller cannot determine whether the state's advice is accurate or even just grounds to remove a particular book from the stands. But even more serious, the state can threaten the seller with legal action if he does not comply to its request.

Thus the existing laws permit the state to go beyond the limits of public service, it allows the authorities to remove books from bookstands without any judicial decision.