INJUNCTION AGAINST the CONTINUED

PUBLICATION of ETHEL MANNIN'S BOOK

CONFESSIONS AND IMPRESSIONS

25 July 1933

In July of 1933 Aleister Crowley sought an injunction against a book by Ethel Mannin which he claimed painted an unflattering portrait of him. On 25 July 1933 Mr. Justice Farwell, in the Chancery Division, refused to grant the interim injunction, sought by Crowley to stop further publication of the book, Confessions and Impressions.

Further details of the trial are contained in the newspaper articles below:

THE YORKSHIRE EVENING POST

Leeds, Yorkshire, England

25 July 1933

(page 8)

BOOK BY MISS ETHEL MANNIN.

ANOTHER AUTHOR COMPLAINS.

Judge Refuses to Grant an Interim Injunction.

Mr. Justice Farwell, in the Chancery Division to-day, refused to grant an interim injunction to stop further publication of Miss Ethel Mannin’s book “Confessions and Impressions.”

Mr. Aleister Crowley, the author, seeking the injunction against Jarrolds Publishers (London), Ltd., William Brendon and Sons, Ltd., printers, and Mrs. Ethel Edith Porteous (Ethel Mannin) complained of certain passages in the book.

Mr. C. Gallop (for the plaintiff) said the defendants took the point that the book was published as long ago as May, 1930, and that Mr. Crowley knew of its publication at that time. Mr. Crowley denied that allegation, and said the passages of which he complained were without foundation.

Mr. John W. Morris (for Miss Mannin), said she had filed an affidavit that Mr. Crowley knew at the time of publication that the book contained an allusion to him. She said she accepted his invitation to a cocktail party, at which he was perfectly friendly, and made no protest against anything which she had written, and did not ask her to withdraw or alter anything.

Mr. Gallop said that Mr. Crowley, in his reply, reiterated his denial that he knew anything at all about the book at the time it was published.

Mr. Justice Farwell said it was a case in which he could not grant an injunction on the motion. There would be no order except that the costs be costs in the action in which Mr. Crowley was claiming damages for alleged libel.

THE TIMES

London, England

26 July 1933

(page 4)

“CONFESSIONS AND IMPRESSIONS.”

INJUNCTION AGAINST FURTHER

PUBLICATION REFUSED.

Mr. Justice Farwell yesterday made no order on a motion by Mr. Edward Alexander Crowley for an injunction to restrain the further publication of a book called “Confessions and Impressions,” by Ethel Mannin.

The defendants were Jarrolds Publishers (London), Limited, the publishers of the book; William Brendon and Son, Limited, the printers; and Mrs. Ethel Edith Porteous (Miss Ethel Mannin), the authoress.

Mr. C. Gallop, for Mr. Crowley, said that the plaintiff was an author who wrote under the style of Aleister Crowley, and he complained of certain passages in the book. The defendants, he (counsel) gathered, were taking the point that the book was published as long ago as 1930 and that Mr. Crowley knew of the publication at the time. Mr. Crowley said that the passages of which he complained were entirely devoid of any foundation, and he denied that he knew of the matter in 1930.

The book, it was true, said counsel, had been through a number of impressions, but Mr. Crowley said that it was not until recently that he became aware of the allusion to him in it, and he was very anxious that the publication of the book should henceforth cease.

Mr. J. W. Morris, for the defendants, stated that Miss Mannin in her affidavit said that it was not correct that the plaintiff did not know until quite recently that there was any allusion to him in her book.

She said that a few weeks after the first publication the plaintiff wrote to her and his letter, she said, was written because she had mentioned him in her book and there was no occasion for his writing and no meaning in his references apart from the fact that she had mentioned him in the book.

Mr. Crowley invited her to a cocktail party. She went to one of the cocktail parties, she said, and the plaintiff was perfectly friendly and he made no protest about what she had written and he did not ask her to withdraw or alter anything she had written.

Mr. Gallop said that Mr. Crowley, in an affidavit in reply, repeated that he knew nothing at all about the book and that he and Miss Mannin were at cross purposes.

Mr. Justice Farwell, as stated, said that he would make no order on the motion, except that the costs would be costs in the action.