Mr. Buckley sets the stage by telling of three young men "who thought it would be amusing or instructive or profitable, or all three, to put out a magazine designed especially for schoolchildren, edited by schoolchildren, on the subject of sex, etc. A so-called Oz No. 28 resulted in prosecution. Six weeks after the magazine hit the streets, the defendants had been tried, convicted, and jailed, which suits Mr. John Selwyn Gummer just fine." Mrs. Short, while "not pro-pornography, [is] anti-anti-pornography legislation." RS: "I think that one can really leave society to look after this problem reasonably successfully. I think that what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own places is their business...." JSG: "I find it very odd. Mrs. Short's the first one to say you can't leave it to individuals to decide whether to put up ugly buildings or not. They have, evidently, to be stopped from doing that, and they have to be stopped from polluting the environment... But for some reason or other, you find it impossible to say that people shouldn't have advertisements which are generally unacceptable on free sale on public stands." A crackling debate-we sometimes feel as if we were on the floor of the House of Commons, with side-trips to Denmark's porn shops, the American Supreme Court, and Times Square.