CONSENTING SEX RELATIONS IN PRIVATE ARE LEGAL

}

New Penal Code

for ILLINOIS

Who Has the

Book Matches

Now?

First of the fifty states to revise laws whereby consenting sex acts between adults in private are no longer a crime is Illinois. A completely revised penal code went into effect in that state at the beginning of the New Year on January 1, 1962. The code has been inicrpreted to mean that homosexual acts between adults without pressure are no longer criminal, when conducted in private, according to the Chicago Sun-Times on December 21.

•

This means that the essential recommendations of the Wolfenden Com mittee as concerns homosexuals in England have been adopted in an American jurisdiction before the changes were adopted in Great Britain, and this is a surprise to many who have studied the matter.

However the Illinois legal revision didn't come as a "change in sex laws" designed mainly to ease a situation for male homosexuals as the Wolfenden recommendations can be interpreted. Instead the legal sanctions are designed to extend to all adults, and they came with a sweeping revision of the entire criminal code of Illinois.

Among other important changes is the matter of obscenity. Says the Chicago Sun-Times "The possession of obscene literature and materials will no longer be a crime as long as they are not sold or disseminated to pérsons under 18 years. Also it will not be a crime for the person in possession of the materials to show them to adult 'friends'."

Some new offenses appear in. the new code: Indecent solicitation of a child was added to contributing to the sexual delinquency of a child; any person 17 years of age or older who solicits a child under 13 to perform a sexually indecent act can be arrested, and receive a maximum penalty of $500 fine or 6 months imprisonment or both. Aggravated battery becomes an offense, including "physical contact of an insulting nature," So does "reckless conduct" which causes bodily harm or endangers the safety of others.

maitachine REVIEW

Grove Press of New York has probably advanced the cause of "Freedom to Read" as much as any other commercial enterprise in the U.S. during the past two years-at least from the standpoint of production of works previously banned in the American trade book field.

Some may argue with documented evidence that the cause has been advanced in reverse-that is, the storms of controversy stirred by the "decent literature" groups have set machinery in motion in the courts which resulted in (a) clearance for most of the books in question, (b) the overturning of many state and local obscenity laws as unconstitutional, and (c) the sobering of legislative bodies into consideration of laws which will stand the test of constitutionality. In some cases, however, such as in Col-· orado, the laws passed were on the side of the censors.

In 1959-1960, Lady Chatterley's Lover occupied center stage in the book scene as the fuel for those, with matches to light the book piles. Hardbound copies were followed by several paper editions. The book can be sold everywhere in the U.S. today, except possibly Boston, but that isn't the point: Copies have been discounted and otherwise moved where possible from the dusty shelves, and they are corrupting nobody.

In Tropic of Cancer in 1961, Grove mayi have published some four-letter words which D. H. Lawrence didn't use, At any rate, out came the book which had been banned for more than 30 years, and it roiled the waters. By December there were 22 localities-states and cities-where the work was on trial. They spread from New England to Honolulu, although in the latter police reneged after ordering it off the bookstore shelves, and it went back on sale. But it was due to come up in court in January.

The issue in every case against Tropic called it "dirt for dirt's sake.” Miller's left-bank life in Paris with bums, whores and pimps for associates was seen by the censors as having no redeeming social or literary importince. In some places it was even called a conspiracy to undermine Amercan morals, and sponsored by you-know-whom.

In California in December the book went on trial with a Marin County bookseller and before a jury of eight women and four men who represented the "average" in the community. This was the only court action taken to date ›efore a jury; all others were trials to be held before judges only.