| |
Unidentified photographer/creator
Offensive Photographs
1879, 24 October
Magazine page
Google Books
LL/35030
Published in The British Journal of Photography, October 24, 1879, p.514.
Offensive Photographs. At the Marylebone Police Court, on Wednesday last, the 22nd hist., Alfred Paul de Witt, 32, photographer, of 103, St. John's-wood-terrace, was brought up on a warrant by Chief Inspector Shore, of Scotland-yard, and charged with unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously uttering and selling certain obscene, wicked, and scandalous prints and photographs. Mr. Collette prosecuted for the Society for the Suppression of Vice, Mr. S. B. Abrahams defending. Mr. Collette, in opening the case, said the prisoner was a photographer, and, besides carrying on a legitimate business, it was notorious that he received women from all parts of London, whom he photographed, and he also reproduced photographic pictures from negatives sent to him for the purpose. This case originated under a warrant under Lord Campbell's Act, and a warrant was also obtained to take the prisoner's body under the ordinary criminal law. St. Ledger Lousada, an officer of the Criminal Investigation Department at Scotland-yard, said he received instructions from Chief Inspector Shore, and also from Mr. Collette, and then proceeded to No. 103, St. John's-wood-terrace, on the 13th instant. He there saw the prisoner and stated his wish to have his photograph taken. The light being indifferent it was postponed until the following day, when he went again and sat for his portrait. He asked the prisoner if he had any photographs of women taken a la mode, and he said he had a few negatives, but he seldom kept them, generally destroying them after he had taken them. Witness said he should like to see them, and the prisoner showed him the negative (produced). Witness ordered some copies from that and other negatives that the prisoner showed him, and also purchased a photograph and then left, the prisoner telling him the others would be ready by the Friday. He called on that day, and the prisoner told him he would have to reprint them, as he had met with an accident with them. Witness called on the Saturday, but they were not printed, and the prisoner told him if he could call on the Sunday they would be finished. Witness called on the Sunday afternoon, but the prisoner was out. He went again on the Monday and saw the prisoner, who handed him six photographs (produced). Witness had paid him £1 9s. 6d. For them and his own photograph on the previous Tuesday. Witness took the pictures to Scotland-yard, and handed them to Chief Superintendent Williamson, and by his instructions he called on Mr. Collette the next morning. He was present that morning at the prisoner's house, with Chief Inspector Shore, when the negatives produced were seized. They corresponded with the pictures he had bought. He recognised among other parcels of negatives now handed to him, and which were seized that morning, two negatives the prisoner had shown him. Cross-examined: He went to the prisoner's once or twice on horseback. The prisoner told him the negatives did not belong to him. The payment of £1 9s. 6d., for which the receipt was now produced, was not solely for his photographs it included the others. His photographs were 17s. 6d. Per dozen. The prisoner, that morning, made no effort of concealment. He told them where the negatives were. John Shore, chief inspector of Scotland-yard, having also given evidence, the prisoner reserved his defence, and Mr. Mansfield committed him for trial. Mr. Collette applied for a summons for the destruction of the negatives and photographs, which Mr. Mansfield granted. Mr. Abrahams asked that the prisoner be allowed to go out on bail, and Mr. Mansfield agreed to accept two sureties in £40 each.
| |
LuminousLint 
@LuminousLint