ited ▁five ▁pro sec utions ▁in ▁ 1 9 5 4 ▁which ▁highlight ed ▁the ▁uncertainty ▁of ▁the ▁law ▁on ▁obsc en ity ▁and ▁that ▁the ▁basis ▁of ▁the ▁existing ▁law , ▁R ▁v ▁H ick lin , ▁had ▁the ▁effect ▁of ▁a ▁string ent ▁literary ▁c ensor ship . ▁Con sequently , ▁the ▁result ant ▁Act ▁made ▁specific ▁provision ▁for ▁a ▁defence ▁of ▁public ▁good , ▁broad ly ▁defined ▁as ▁a ▁work ▁of ▁art istic ▁or ▁scientific ▁mer it , ▁intended ▁to ▁exclude ▁literature ▁from ▁the ▁scope ▁of ▁the ▁law ▁while ▁still ▁perm itting ▁the ▁pro sec ution ▁of ▁por n ography ▁or ▁such ▁works ▁which ▁would ▁under ▁section ▁ 2 ▁of ▁the ▁Act ▁” t end ▁to ▁dep ra ve ▁and ▁cor rupt ▁persons ▁likely ▁to ▁read ▁it ”. ▁The ▁Act ▁also ▁required ▁the ▁court ▁to ▁consider ▁the ▁work ▁as ▁a ▁whole , ▁put ▁a ▁time ▁limit ▁on ▁pro sec utions , ▁provided ▁books ellers ▁with ▁a ▁defence ▁of ▁innoc ent ▁dis sem ination , ▁gave ▁publish ers ▁a ▁right ▁of ▁defence ▁against ▁a ▁destruction ▁order , ▁provided ▁the ▁right ▁of ▁appeal , ▁and ▁limited ▁the ▁penalty ▁of ▁conv iction . ▁The ▁Act ▁came ▁into ▁force ▁on ▁ 3 0 ▁August ▁ 1 9 5 9 . ▁ ▁The ▁Director ▁of ▁Public ▁Pro sec utions ▁( DP P ), ▁Sir ▁The ob ald ▁Mat hew , ▁made ▁submission ▁to ▁the ▁Bill ' s ▁Commons ▁Select ▁Committee ▁on ▁ 2 7 ▁May ▁ 1 9 5 7 ▁that ▁his ▁office ▁would ▁"