▁the ▁distinction ▁between ▁fel ony ▁and ▁mis de mean our , ▁it ▁was ▁regarded ▁as ▁a ▁mis de mean our . ▁It ▁has ▁been ▁abol ished ▁in ▁England ▁and ▁Wales ▁and ▁Northern ▁Ireland . ▁ ▁The ▁existence ▁of ▁this ▁off ence ▁was ▁denied ▁by ▁Haw kins ; ▁and ▁by ▁Hol t , ▁C . J ., ▁who ▁said ▁that ▁it ▁was ▁within ▁the ▁juris diction ▁of ▁the ▁spiritual ▁courts . ▁ ▁England ▁and ▁Wales ▁It ▁was ▁an ▁off ence ▁under ▁the ▁common ▁law ▁of ▁England ▁and ▁Wales ▁to ▁publish ▁an ▁obsc ene ▁lib el . ▁This ▁was ▁an ▁ind ict able - only ▁off ence . ▁However , ▁section ▁ 2 ( 4 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Ob scene ▁Publications ▁Act ▁ 1 9 5 9 ▁provided ▁that ▁a ▁person ▁publishing ▁an ▁article ▁should ▁not ▁be ▁proceeded ▁against ▁for ▁an ▁off ence ▁at ▁common ▁law ▁consisting ▁of ▁the ▁publication ▁of ▁any ▁matter ▁contained ▁or ▁emb od ied ▁in ▁that ▁article ▁where ▁it ▁was ▁of ▁the ▁ess ence ▁of ▁the ▁off ence ▁that ▁the ▁matter ▁is ▁" ob scene ". ▁For ▁this ▁purpose ▁the ▁word ▁" ob scene " ▁was ▁defined ▁by ▁section ▁ 1 ( 1 ) ▁of ▁that ▁Act . ▁ ▁Lord ▁Re id ▁said : ▁ ▁According ly , ▁the ▁effect ▁of ▁section ▁ 2 ( 4 ) ▁is ▁that ▁it ▁was ▁not ▁possible ▁for ▁a ▁person ▁to ▁be ▁pro sec uted ▁for ▁this ▁off ence , ▁unless ▁the ▁definition ▁of ▁" ob scene " ▁at ▁common ▁law ▁was ▁wider ▁than ▁the