## Facts

- A metal broker distributed a strongly anti-Catholic pamphlet, *The Confessional Unmasked*, containing religious polemic and explicit sexual descriptions associated with confession.
- Local authorities initiated a summary obscenity proceeding under a statute authorizing seizure and destruction of obscene publications.
- Justices issued a warrant, seized 252 copies from the distributor’s premises, and ordered the copies destroyed as obscene.
- The distributor argued the pamphlet was published to expose alleged abuses and deter immorality, not to corrupt readers.

## Issues

1. Whether a publisher’s moral or reformist motive can defeat a finding that a publication is obscene.
2. How “obscene” should be defined for purposes of statutory seizure and destruction of publications.
3. Whether obscenity may be determined by isolated passages rather than the work considered as a whole, and by reference to susceptible readers rather than typical adults.

## Decision

- The Queen’s Bench reversed the recorder’s order that had set aside the destruction order and reinstated the destruction of the seized pamphlets.
- The court held the publisher’s motive was immaterial if the material was obscene in fact.
- The court adopted a definition of obscenity based on the tendency of the material to deprave and corrupt susceptible persons.
- The court permitted condemnation of a publication based on particular passages, without requiring assessment of the work as a whole.

## Legal Principles

- Material is obscene if it has a tendency “to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall.”
- Obscenity is assessed by likely effect on susceptible readers, not by the reaction of a reasonable or average adult.
- A publisher’s intent or asserted moral purpose does not prevent a finding of obscenity.
- Discrete excerpts may be evaluated independently; if any part is obscene, authorities may suppress the publication.

## Conclusion

The court established a broad obscenity test centered on the corrupting tendency of content on susceptible audiences, treating intent and overall context as irrelevant and allowing suppression based on isolated passages, thereby supporting seizure and destruction of the pamphlets.


Regina v. Hicklin, 11 Cox C.C. 19 (Q.B. 1868)