FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102  
103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   >>  
f Lords and the House of Commons, 1909, on Stage Plays (Censorship). He may speak for himself here. Mr. G. K. Chesterton is called in, and examined. Question 6141 (_Chairman_). I understand that you appear here to give evidence on behalf of the average man? G.K.C. Yes, that is so. I represent the audience, in fact. I am neither a dramatist nor a dramatic critic. I do not quite know why I am here, but if anybody wants to know my views on the subject they are these: I am for the censorship, but I am against the present Censor. I am very strongly for the censorship, and I am very strongly against the present Censor. The whole question I think turns on the old democratic objection to despotism. I am an old-fashioned person and I retain the old democratic objection to despotism. I would trust 12 ordinary men, but I cannot trust one ordinary man. 6142. You prefer the jury to the judge?--Yes, exactly; that is the very point. It seems to me that if you have one ordinary man judging, it is not his ordinariness that appears, but it is his extraordinariness that appears. Take anybody you like--George III for instance. I suppose that George III was a pretty ordinary man in one sense. People called him Farmer George. He was very like a large number of other people, but when he was alone in his position things appeared in him that were not ordinary--that he was a German, and that he was mad, and various other facts. Therefore, my primary principle---- 6143. He gloried in the name of Briton?--I know he did. That is what showed him to be so thoroughly German. LORD NEWTON. He spelt it wrongly. WITNESS. Therefore, speaking broadly, I would not take George III's opinion, but I would take the opinion of 12 George III's on any question. The taking of the "evidence" took several hours, but it never yielded anything more than this: The local jury is a better judge of what is right and proper than a single Censor. Juries may differ in their judgments; but why not? Is it not desirable that Hampstead and Highgate should each have an opportunity of finding out independen
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102  
103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   >>  



Top keywords:

ordinary

 

George

 
Censor
 

present

 

strongly

 

censorship

 

Therefore

 

appears

 

German

 
objection

democratic

 
despotism
 
question
 
evidence
 
called
 

opinion

 

desirable

 

judgments

 

primary

 

taking


gloried

 

principle

 

Hampstead

 

Highgate

 

position

 

independen

 

people

 

finding

 
things
 

opportunity


appeared

 

Briton

 

NEWTON

 

broadly

 
speaking
 
WITNESS
 

yielded

 
differ
 
Juries
 

single


showed
 
proper
 

wrongly

 

represent

 

audience

 

average

 

behalf

 

critic

 

dramatic

 

dramatist