“It is very difficult to see upon what theory these world-renowned classics can be regarded as specimens of that pornographic literature which it is the office of the Society for the Suppression of Vice to suppress, or how they can come under any stronger condemnation than that high standard literature which consists of the works of Shakespeare, of Chaucer, of Laurence Sterne, and of other great English writers, without making reference to many parts of the Old Testament Scriptures, which are to be found in almost every household in the land. The very artistic character, the high qualities of style, the absence of those glaring and crude pictures, scenes, and descriptions which affect the common and vulgar mind, make a place for books of the character in question, entirely apart from such gross and obscene writings as it is the duty of the public authorities to suppress. It would be quite as unjustifiable to condemn the writings of Shakespeare and Chaucer and Laurence Sterne, the early English Novelists, the playwrights of the Restoration, and the dramatic literature which has so much enriched the English language, as to place an interdict upon these volumes, which have received the admiration of literary men for so many years.” (_Re Worthington Co._, 30 N. Y. Supp. 361, 362; 24 L. R. A. 110.) Andrews, _J._: “With the author’s felicitous style, it contains passages of purity and beauty * * * Here is the work of a great author, written in admirable style, which has become a part of classical literature.” (_Halsey_ v. _N. Y. Society_, 234 N. Y. 1, 4, 6.) Seabury, _J._: “Offensive as some of the phrases of this book undoubtedly are to the taste of our day, yet I do not think we can declare a contract for its sale illegal on this account.” (_St. Hubert Guild_ v. _Quinn_, 64 Misc. 336, 338.) Literature, to use the phrase of Matthew Arnold, is nothing more nor less than a criticism of life, of the relation of man to the universe and to his fellow man. When any phase of that subject is discussed, then you have literature, though you may not agree with the point of view which the author advocates. Thus, in one of the cases from which we have already frequently cited, Seabury, _J._, points out the violent differences of opinion that arose and still exist, regarding Voltaire’s “Maid of Orleans”: “Frederick the Great admired it and paid it the doubtful compliment of imitation, and Condorcet regarded it only as an attack upon hypocrisy and superstition. Less prejudiced critics than these condemn it with severity, and even admirers of Voltaire regret that there are passages in it which have dimmed the fame of its author.” (_St. Hubert Guild_ v. _Quinn_, 64 Misc. 336, 338.)