The case was taken to Court, and the decision of Judge Harry M. Fisher of the Circuit Court of Cook County was in favor of granting a license to the Clinic. But the opposition appealed the case. The decision of the higher court in March, 1924, was that the granting of a license was entirely within the discretion of the Health Commissioner. There could hardly be a clearer instance showing the influence of the precedent which the Federal law affords, to suppress contraceptive knowledge in States which have no law against the giving of verbal personal instructions. Had there been no legal precedent outside of Illinois, in the absence of any suppressive law within the State, the Health Commissioner would have had no basis for his action except his personal opinion. That alone would, in all probability, not have been deemed sufficient basis for suppressing the Clinic. However, as it was only because the Clinic was to give _free_ service that it required a license, the charging of a small fee enabled the same people to arrange for the same clinical service under the name “Medical Center,” and two of these are now operating in Chicago with marked success. Shorn thus of his opportunity to suppress this service through his licensing power, the Health Commissioner apparently does not consider it worth while to institute proceedings against the Medical Center, as he still might do if he wished to press the Federal precedent into use again,—especially as the report of the first year’s work of the two medical centers has now been published. (The substance of this report is given in Appendix No. 3,—expurgated sufficiently to avoid making this book “unmailable” under Section 211 of the Federal Criminal Code.) The question has often been asked why publishers do not sell books on scientific contraceptive methods, in the 24 States where there are no local laws to forbid it. There is great demand for such books, and the present secret way of circulating the relatively few authoritative ones in existence is most inadequate for the people’s need. As there are nearly 50,000,000 people in these 24 States, why not give them what they need and want now, without waiting for the slow and uncertain action of Congress in repealing the Federal prohibition? The answer is very illuminating.