was not easy Supreme Court de-constitutionalized the state obscenity statute by knocking out the conviction of a Bourbon St. stripper known at the 'cat girl.' Dist. Atty. Richard Dowling, who initiated the 1958 French Quarter raids, averred that "as a man" he had nothing against the strippers on Bourbon St., but made several proposals for patching up the 'gap' in the law. Why is it that when a court rules a law unconstitutional that legislators and police immediately assume that they have been 'accidentally' deprived of a legal weapon, and they must immediately restore what the Court has ruled out? Times-Picayune editorialized that legislators had misunderstood the court's earlier demand that such laws be clarified, and had merely added lists of synonyms to the word 'indecent,' as if that constituted legally satisfactory definition. Various civic organizations hysterically set up decency committees. City Council planned a new obsenity statute. Police Supt. Provosty Dayries raided news agencies and seized 5000 allegedly obscene magazines. Big CDL rally laid the whole subject to filth. Speakers piously denied, as usual, they were advocating censorship, quoted long passages from 'objectionable' publications, and charged that publishers who were hiding behind freedom of the press were blackjacking public officials. (Let's see them prove a single example of that.) There was the usual nonsense about obscenity corrupting juveniles and causing sex crimes -points well answered by the Drs. Kronhausen in their book, PORNOGRAPHY AND THE LAW (available in hard cover from ONE Bookservice at $5, or in cheaper paper-back on many newsstands) and in a talk to the Los Angeles V.D. Council. They flatly denied there was any evidence por-

when the Louisiana

nography has the alleged corrupting effect, and argued that erotic realism is actually necessary to sound mental health, in children particularly...

In letter to Times-Picayune, reader Fred Sackett said that the very people who howl the loudest about government interference in private affairs are usually the ones who call for restrictive laws on the rights of adults to choose their own reading...

WASH., D.C.: Dr. Benjamin Karpman, author of the monumental study, THE SEXUAL OFFENDER AND HIS OFFENSES, and longtime chief psychotherapist of St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, recently upset several Congressmen with his statement to a Nat'l. Civil Liberties Clearing House that highly vocal opponents of obscenity have an actual affinity for it. Stung to the quick, Rep. Roman C. Pucinski (D., III.) said Karpman had insulted all House members who've backed anti-obscenity legislation. He and . Rep. Carl Elliott (D. Ala.) threatened to investigate St. Elizabeth's (Federal Mental Hospital) and to "look further into the philosophy of this individual," to see if he has the qualifications to serve in this very important position." Karpman replied by reaffirming his original statement, and adding that Congress could hardly fire him since. he'd retired 2 years ago, and had since served as unpaid volunteer consultant to make up for fact that Congress didn't give hospital enough money to hire a full staff. Pucinski said Congressmen were trying to pass anti-obscenity legislation, and expressed fear that Karpman's statement may jeopardize it by "exposing the sponsor to a great deal of ridicule." If congressmen are going to make themselves ridiculous, they can hardly blame Dr. Karpman for it. . .