useless to pursue this subject, for, to use the favorite phrase of the late Chief Justice White, “to state the argument is to answer it”. No, the test is whether the thing is literary; whether it is a criticism of life; whether that effort is apparent in the book. 3--In applying this test, all reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of the book. The courts, to repeat, apply the simple test of literature as distinct from the mere portrayal of the obscene. And in getting at whether a thing is literature, they are not disposed to substitute their judgment for that of others who speak of the book in the spirit of sincerity; nor are they disposed to tip the scales, even if people of that sort differ in their conclusions. “We have quoted”, says Andrews, _J._, in the latest case, “estimates of the book as showing the manner in which it affects different minds. The conflict among the members of this court itself points a finger at the dangers of a censorship entrusted to men of one profession, of like education and similar surroundings.” (_Halsey_ v. _N. Y. Society_, 234 N. Y. 1, 6.) Likewise, the opinions in _St. Hubert’s Guild_ v. _Quinn_ (64 Misc. 336), and _Matter of Worthington_ (30 N. Y. Supp. 363; 24 L. R. A. 110) refer to various criticisms of the books involved, as do the opinions of Magistrate Simpson and Magistrate Oberwager in the very recent (and still unreported) cases of _People_ v. _Seltzer_ and _People_ v. _Salsberg and Boni & Liveright_. In all of those cases the criticisms were contained in book or magazine form, which were available to the Court. In the present case the various criticisms of the book here involved are not available in such form, and consequently we are submitting herewith copies of letters and newspaper clippings containing the opinions of many competent critics concerning that book, which we respectfully ask this Court to consider in rendering its decision upon this motion. 4--In judging the book by the standards above indicated, it must be read as a whole, and, on that basis, it must be upheld even though it may contain portions which would not stand the test if isolated.