THE PICTURE “SLEEP.”

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2097, 25 January 1908, Page 2

THE PICTURE “SLEEP.”

IS. IT INDECENT?

Press Association. WELLINGTON, January 21

A feature of the prosecution of Whittaker, the bookseller, for selling I a magazine with alleged indecent pic- I turos in it, was the appearance of 1 Mr. Lindsay Bernard Hall in the witness box for the defence. He is tho director of the National Gallery' at Melbourne, and the painter of the picture “Sleep” reproduced in the magazine. He stated that he had been painting these pictures, off and on, for seven years, and they had been exhibited in Melbourne, Sydney, and Adelaide, and had been commented upon, lor and against. Ho, had been painting for thirty years, and had never in all his life, heard works of this sort referred to as indecent. ‘‘Sleep” was a decorative picture meant to beautify a wall. It was meant to convey the impression of beat, sleep, and stillness. In all the | reviews of the picture that had been printed, not one suggestion of in- | decency bad been made. | Detective McGrath said that the picture, as a work of art, is not indecent, but might it not be so under other circumstances? Witness:“l only know how they regard the nude throughout tho world, I don’t know how they regard it here, or if they regard the nude as indecent.” Mr. Herdman: Do you consider that the reproduction of your pict--1 uro in the “Lone Hand,” would conI -.tituto a circumstance in Miiicli it I would become indecent? Witness: Oh no certainly not!” I Witness volunteered a statement I to tho Bench that he was not inI terested in this case one way or the 1 other. He was simply asked by the proprietors of the “Lone Hand” if ho would allow them to reproduce liis picture, and he gave his permission.

A number of other witnesses were called, including the Hon. T. K. MacDonald, Mr. H. S. Wardell, S. M, president of the Academy of Fine Arts, and Mr. Illingworth, the sculptor, who scouted the idea of prosecution for such a cause. One of them denounced it as a grotesque absurdity. Judgment was reserved.