Page:1902 Encyclopædia Britannica - Volume 25 - A-AUS.pdf/117

 ADVERTISEMENT disfigurement, by giving preference, in private transactions, to makers and dealers who do not employ objectionable methods, and by avoiding, as far as possible, the purchase of wares which, in their individual opinion, are offensively puffed. Action on these lines is advised rather for its educational than for its immediately deterrent effect; although, in the case of many of the more expensive commodities, makers would undoubtedly be much influenced by the knowledge that they would lose, rather than gain, custom. The foregoing proposals are based on the following estimate of the conditions of the problem. It is believed that the present licence causes discomfort or loss of enjoyment to many, and that, in the absence of authoritative restriction, it must grow far beyond its present limits ; that beauty or propriety of aspect in town and country form as real a part of the national wealth as any material product, and that to save these from impairment is a national interest; that the recent developments of vexatiously obtrusive advertising have not grown out of any necessities of honourable business, but are partly the result of a mere instinct of imitation, and partly are a morbid phase of competition by which both the consumers and the trade as a whole lose ; that restriction as regards the size and positions of advertising notices would not be a hardship to those who want publicity—since all competitors would be treated alike, each would have the same relative prominence ; that, as large sums of public money are expended on institutions intended to develop the finer taste, and on edifices of elaborate design, it must be held inconsistent with established public policy to permit the sensibilities thus imparted to be wounded, and architectural effect to be destroyed at the discretion of a limited class. The influence of this society is to be seen in many of the restrictions which have been imposed upon advertisers since its work began. About a year after its foundation the London County Council abolished (under statutory powers obtained from Parliament) advertisements coming within the definition of sky-signs in the London Building Act of 1894. These specifications are as follows :— “Sky sign” means any word, letter, model, sign, device, or representation in the nature of an advertisement, announcement, or direction supported on or attached to any post, pole, standard, framework, or other support, wholly or in part upon, over, or above any building or structure, which, or any part of which, sky sign shall be Adsible against the sky from any point in any street or public way, and includes all and every part of any such post, pole, standard, framework, or other support. The expression “sky sign’’shall also include any balloon, parachute, or similar device employed wholly or in part for the purposes of any advertisements or announcement on, over, or above any building, structure, or erection of any kind, or on or over any street or public way. The Act proceeds to exclude from its restrictions flagstaffs, weathercocks, and any solid signs not rising more than 3 feet above the roof. Another bye-law of the London County Council, in great measure due to the observations made at coroners’ inquests, protects the public against the annoyances and the perils to traffic occasioned by flashlight and searchlight advertisements. This bye-law reads as follows No person shall exhibit any flashlight so as to be visible from any street and to cause danger to the traffic therein, nor shall any owner or occupier of premises permit or suffer any flashlight to be so exhibited on such premises. The expression “flashlight” means and includes any light used for the purpose of illuminating, lighting, or exhibiting any word, letter, model, sign, device, or representation in the nature of an advertisement, announcement, or direction which alters suddenly either in intensity, colour, or direction. No person shall exhibit any searchlight so as to be visible from any street and to cause danger to the traffic therein, nor shall any owner or occupier of premises permit or suffer any searchlight to be so exhibited on such premises. The expression “searchlight” means and includes any light exceeding 500-candle power, whether in one lamp or lantern, or in a series of lamps or lanterns used together and projected as one concentrated light, and which alters either in intensity, colour, or direction. Advertising vans were so troublesome in London as to be prohibited in 1853; the “sandwich-man” has in the City of London and many towns been ousted from the pavement to the gutter, from the more crowded to the

97

less crowded streets, and as the traffic problem in the great centres of population becomes more urgent, he will probably be altogether suppressed. Hoardings are now so restricted by the London Building Acts that new hoardings cannot, except under special conditions, be erected exceeding 12 feet in height, and no existing hoardings can be increased in height so as to exceed that limit. The huge signs which some advertisers, both in England and the United States, have placed in such positions as to mar the landscape, have so far aroused public antagonism that there is reason to hope that this form of nuisance will not increase. In 1899 Edinburgh obtained effective poAvers of control over all sorts of advertising in public places, and this achievement has been followed by no little agitation in favour of a Parliamentary enactment which should once for all do aAvay with the defacing of the landscape in any part of the United Kingdom. The society already mentioned has drafted a Rural Advertisements Bill in the following terms :— (1) The power of a County Council to make bye-laws conferred by Section 16 of the Local Government Act 1888, shall, subject to the provisions of that section, extend to bye-laws :— {a) For regulating or prohibiting the erection or placing of advertisements in or upon any arable or pasture land, Avoodland, garden, public park, common, or Avaste land, foreshore, or any inland or tidal Avater. (b) For enforcing the removal of advertisements erected or placed in contravention of the bye-laAvs. (c) For enforcing the remoAral, within a prescribed time—not being less than one year after the bye-laAvs come into operation— of any adA'crtisements erected or placed before the making of the bye-laAvs in such a manner as Avould be in contravention of the bye-laAvs, if the same had been previously made. (2) Nothing in any bye-laAV to be made under this Act shall affect any advertisement erected or placed either before or after the passing of this Act, upon any premises and relating solely to any trade, business, or business transaction carried on, or proposed to be carried on, or any entertainment or meeting held or to be held, upon or in relation to the said premises or to any property thereon. (3) This Act shall not apply to or have any effect in the administrative county of London or in any [municipal] borough. The English Uav with regard to posters has undergone very little change. The Metropolitan Police Act 1839 (2 & 3 Viet. cap. 47) first put a stop to unauthorized posting, and the Indecent Advertisements Act of 1889 (section 3) penalized the public exposure of any picture or printed or written matter of an indecent or obscene nature. But in general practice there is hardly any limitation to the size or character of poster advertisements, other than good taste and public opinion. On the other hand, public opinion is a somewhat xrague entity, and there have been cases in which a conflict has arisen as to Avhat public opinion really was, when its legally authorized exponent was in a position to insist on its own arbitrary definition. Such an instance occurred some few years ago in the case of a large poster issued by a well-known London musichall. The Progressive majority on the London County Council, led by Mr M‘Dougall, a well-known “purity” advocate, took exception to this poster, which represented a female gymnast in “ tights ” posed in what was doubtless intended for an alluring and attractive attitude; and, in spite of any argument, the fact remained that the decision as to renewing the license of this music-hall rested solely Avith the Council. In showing that it would have no hesitation in provoking even a charge of meddling prudery, the Council probably gave a salutary Avarning to people who were inclined to sail rather too near the wind. But in Great Britain and America, at all events (though a doubt may perhaps exist as to some Continental countries), the advertiser and the artist are restrained, not only by their S. L— 13