◆ SpookStack

Se AD 2h 0-88 to choose between these theories. In the first place, under either theory the ma-:erial may not be excluded in this case. Mcreover, I believe that the two theories are but opposite sides of one coin. For it is the importer's acientific in- terest in the material which leads to the conditional privilege, . and it is this same interest which requires the holding that the appeal of the material to the scientist is not to his prurient interest and that, therefore, the material is not 4 obscene as to him. There remain to be mentioned two objections which the Government raises to the course of decision I follow today. The first is that the second proviso of §305(a) of the Tariff 34 It may be that the drafters of Tentative Draft No. 6 of the A.L.I. Model Penal Code have adopted both theories. §207.10(4)(c) of the Draft, quoted in note 2k, supra, creates a limited exception to the prohibition of dissemination of obscenity in favor of “institutions or individuals having ecientific or other special justification for possessing such material." And §207.10(2) of the Draft sets forth the class - a8 to which the material's appeal shall be judged as follows: “Obscenity shall be judged with reference to ordinary adults, except that it shall be judged with reference to children or other specially susceptible audience if it appears from the character of the material or the circumstances of its dissemi- nation to be specially designed for or directed to such an audience." It is possible to understand the term “specially susceptible" to include not only those who are specially more suse otible, but also those who are specially less susceptible. See Comment 9 to the Draft and page » mn. 59.