QUESTION. (Hansard, 29 April 1870)

§ MR. ASSHETON CROSS

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is his intention to issue any rules or to take any other steps for the guidance of the police as to the duties implied by the words "supervision of the police" in the Habitual Criminals Act, 1869? After a second conviction persons were to be subject to police supervision; and, in order to carry the Act into execution, it was necessary, first, that the criminal as well as the ordinary policeman should know what was meant; and, secondly, that those who had to pass sentence upon prisoners should know how that sentence was likely to be carried out. In some cases he knew that magistrates had declined to put the law in force, except for a very limited time, thinking that its provisions would be very severe upon prisoners; while, in others, they had allowed, as a matter of course, supervision for the full term of seven years. Was it intended that the police should 2134 keep a watch over persons who had been twice convicted, and, finding them under suspicious circumstances, should exercise the power vested in them? All that, however, would be useless, if convicted persons had the opportunity of removing to other parts of the country and living there practically unknown, and he, therefore, suggested that such persons should be required to give notice to the police of their removal. It might be said that those who had superintendence of the police should be left to make their own regulations, but he considered it very important that the action should be uniform throughout the kingdom.

MR. BRUCE

said, the word "supervision" was certainly open to criticism; for there was no provision defined by the Act, which, however, enacted that persons who had been twice convicted should lose that assumption of innocence which attached to everyone else in this country. The extent to which supervision was ordered by the Habitual Criminals Act was, that the police should exercise special vigilance with regard to those who had been twice previously convicted, but the Act could not define the manner in which that vigilance was to be displayed. The principal security for the public was the system of registration of criminals, which was now being carefully pursued, and would, he hoped, in a short time have excellent effects. Steps were now being taken to photograph criminals, and descriptions of them, and statements of all circumstances likely to lead to their identification, were now circulated, so that habitual offenders might be the more readily recognized. He would consider the recommendation of his hon. Friend, and when they came to discuss the Bill for the Amendment of the Habitual Criminals Act, he should be in a position to say on behalf of the Government whether it was possible to comply with the recommendation, and prepare instructions for general circulation for the use of the police throughout the country.