LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been directed to the contents of a Letter from the Rev. Mr. Lee, published in The Times of Wednesday the 5th inst., detailing certain acts of outrage and violence attempted against the person of the officiating Minister and others during the performance of Divine Service in the Church of St. George's-in-the-East on Sunday last; and whether the Home Secretary will take efficient steps to prevent the recurrence of such outrages on Sunday next.
§ MR. BUTLERsaid, that before the question was answered he had a statement to make, and a question to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, upon a matter in which the safety of human life might be involved. It was necessary for him in the first place to read an extract from a letter which he had received that morning from one of the churchwardens of St. George's-in-the-East. That extract was as follows:—
From the experience of the past, and particularly of Sunday last, I fear that should the church be opened on next Sunday evening, injury and loss of life will he the consequence. I do not state this from any fear of my own safety, for, judging from my present indisposition, brought on by the anxiety and fatigue caused by the disturbances, in all probability I shall not be able to attend the church on Sunday next.The question he had to put to the Home Secretary was, Whether he has any objection 808 to state distinctly what steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of the lamentable scenes which took place in St. George's-in-the-East on Sunday last, and, if loss of life should unhappily occur, who will be held responsible?
MR. HENLEYsaid that in the early part of the week the Secretary of State for the Home Department was reported to have said,—"The House will understand that the law does not arm the Police with the power of summary interference in cases of noisy disturbances, or interruptions of silence and order during public worship." He wished to know whether from that answer the country is to understand that the police or other constables are not authorized and required, when requested by the proper authorities, who are the minister and churchwardens of the church, to apprehend persons wilfully disturbing or interrupting public worship, either within or without the church?
§ MR. CLIVEsaid, he would beg leave, in the absence of his right hon. Friend (Sir G. Lewis) who, he regretted to say was unable to be present from indisposition, to answer the three questions which had been put. In reply to the question of the noble Lord (Lord H. Lennox), he had to say that the paragraph in The Times which he had referred to had not escaped, the observation of the Home Secretary or of the Chief Commissioner of Police. Upon the appearance of that paragraph Sir Richard Mayne wrote to Mr. Lee to the following effect:—
I observe in The Times a letter with your signature, in which it is stated that 'Mr. King was kicked by a man, who easily managed to get away from the crowd. Another man, calling ma a name not usually printed, struck me a violent blow on the stomach, in which act the bystanders, with one exception, seemed to sympathize with him.' I request you will let me know where you were at the time, and whether the assault took place after the service was over—also that you will give as correct a description as you can of the party. It is mentioned in the Police report that Inspector Harrison was called to go to the church, as Mr. King had been assaulted, but Mr. King said he did not know the man who assaulted him. It was not mentioned to any one or made known to the Police that you were assaulted. I have a report from three of the Police who were in the church in plain clothes, who followed close behind down the aisle, who did not see any assault committed upon you, nor did they hear of it till they saw your letter. If communication had been made to the Police at the time the party would have been taken into custody, and if you will give me information the Police will do all in their power to apprehend him.No answer had yet been received to that 809 letter. As to the question of the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Butler) there had been nothing in the disturbances hitherto, so far as he could judge from the reports of the police, to raise any apprehension that loss of life was at all probable. No doubt most improper and indecorous interruptions of the public worship had taken place, but there appeared no necessity for further precautions than those already taken. ["Oh, oh!"] He would be glad if hon. Members would hear him out, and he would tell them what those precautions were. For six successive Sundays the Chief Commissioner of police sent between thirty and forty constables, with a superintendent, to attend the church at all the services. They accordingly attended during part of the month of November and the whole of the month of December, and reported that, although there were interruptions by the shuffling of feet and reading the responses in a disrespectful manner, nothing whatever occurred which they could lay hold of to justify the arrest of any person. As the functions of the police were interrupted, and other duties were neglected, it was thought desirable at the end of the six weeks to put a few men in plain clothes within the building. Since the 1st of January a certain number of men had attended the services, and they also reported that they had been unable to fix on any person who had committed any such outrage as would justify his apprehension. Mr. Inspector Harrison's report, which applied to what took place last Sunday, contained this statement:—I beg to report that on Sunday last I was called to the church and informed that Mr. B. King had been assaulted. I saw Mr. King, and asked whether he wished to give any person into custody. He said no; he did not know the man who had assaulted him. At that time Mr. King was surrounded by fifteen or sixteen gentlemen, his personal friends. I heard nothing of an assault on Mr. F. G. Lee, except by his letter in The Times newspaper.In addition to the body of police within the church a large body were placed outside within a few yards, and the churchwarden was informed that on notice of their being required they were ready to enter. He apprehended that it was not within the duties of the police to suppress manifestations of disapprobation, but that it would undoubtedly be their duty to take into custody any person whom they saw committing an outrage, or assault, or in any way misbehaving himself. With respect to the question as to the laws, the right 810 hon. Gentleman (Mr. Henley) was, no doubt, perfectly aware that a police constable could not arrest any person for a common assault unless he witnessed it. The police had, therefore, naturally looked to the churchwarden or any person who was assaulted to give information; of course, had they witnessed the assault they would have taken the person committing it into custody. The churchwarden intimated to the police that they should be at the door to assist him. They were at the door, and when the churchwarden was asked if he wished their interference, the answer was that he did not. The only statute which would authorize a constable to arrest any person was that of Queen Mary, the words of which were directed against any person who should "molest, disturb, vex, trouble, or unlawfully ill-use any preacher or preachers while celebrating mass or any Divine service." A subsequent statute gave no power of arrest, but merely of issuing a summons, upon which the party summoned might be bound in recognizances to keep the peace.
MR. HENLEYsaid, that as no definite answer had been given to his definite question, he should renew it upon a subsequent evening.
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, he wished to know what steps the Government intend taking to prevent a scene of disgraceful riot next Sunday.
§ MR. CLIVEsaid, he had already answered that question. The same strong body of police which had been on duty at that church for the last eight or ten weeks would be there again. He did not know whether any hon. Gentleman had anything else to suggest. There would, of course, be also police outside the church and ready to be called in.