OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 6 May 1870)

§ MR. CHARLEY

rose, according to Notice, to call the attention of the House to the question of illegal lotteries. The first lottery established in England for public purposes was in 1569, and the money thus raised was applied to the repair of certain harbours. Lotteries for various private purposes were authorized subsequently, until the passion for this species of gaming rose to such a height, that, in 1699, a statute was passed, "for suppressing of Lotteries," whereby they were declared public nuisances, and the penalty of £500 was inflicted on the persons who should keep any lottery open; and this was followed by a series of statutes in the reign of Queen Anne, and in the subsequent reigns. State lotteries, however, continued to be authorized by law, 351 and down to 1826 the statute book was crowded with. Acts, authorizing the raising of money "for the service of His Majesty," by this means. In 1808, however, a Committee reported most strongly against the consequences which resulted from the speculation to which they gave rise. They said that numerous families were ruined by this species of gambling and their members reduced to destitution, whereby trade was greatly injured and the poor rates greatly increased; while, at the same time, there was no mode of raising money for the State which was so burdensome, pernicious, and unproductive. The practice, however, still continued. The last statute by which money was authorized to be raised for the public service by way of lottery was the 4 Geo. IV. c. 60, by the 19th section of which it is recited that "whereas it may be expedient to discontinue raising money for the public service by way of lottery after the sale of tickets authorized by this Act;" and subsequent sections provide for the termination of the system on the expiry of three years from the passing of the Act. Virtually by this statute public lotteries were abolished. Whilst, however, State lotteries had thus been sanctioned, the Legislature had endeavoured to suppress all other kinds of lotteries, and from 1699 to 1845 various statutes were passed for their suppression. They were declared illegal, and the prohibition was attempted to be enforced by the infliction of heavy penalties upon the promoters, which, were assigned in varying proportions between the informers and the Crown, or by indictment of the projectors as rogues and vagabonds. By the earlier statutes any person was able to institute proceedings; but by the 42 Geo. III., while any person was still at liberty to proceed by indictment, the consent of the Attorney General was necessary to proceedings whereby any pecuniary penalty was sought to be recovered. By the statute 6 & 7 Will. IV., entitled "An Act to prevent the advertising of Foreign and other illegal Lotteries," it was recited that, whereas the laws in force were insufficient to prevent the advertising of foreign and other illegal lotteries, it was enacted that no person should advertise such lotteries under penalty of £50, which might be sued for by any person, one-half of which were to go to the informer, and the other 352 half to the Crown. This Act gave rise to vexatious proceedings by informers against printers and others, who had unwittingly violated the statute; and a Bill was introduced in 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 74), by which all such actions then pending were summarily stopped, and it was enacted that thereafter all penalties under the former statute should be sued for in the name of the Attorney or Solicitor General in England and Ireland, or of the Lord Advocate in Scotland, and that the whole penalties should go to Her Majesty. That was the present state of the law. When this statute was passing through Parliament, no debate took place upon it in the House of Commons; but in the House of Lords there were brief discussions on the second and third readings, in the course of which Lord Derby, who had charge of the Bill, assured Lord Monteagle that the statute was not intended to remain a dead letter. To a certain extent that undertaking had been carried out. In Scotland he believed there had been no complaint of any infraction of the law; and in England proceedings had been occasionally instituted; and in the present year persons had been indicted and convicted at the Central Criminal Court, and sentenced to fine and imprisonment. Now, under these circumstances, he might be asked, what was the complaint he had to make? From a correspondence entered into by the secretary of the Scottish Reformation Society with the First Lord of the Treasury and the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Home Office, he found that it was complained that while, on the one hand, an endeavour was made to enforce the law with regard to other kinds of lotteries, no attempt was made to do so in the case of Roman Catholic lotteries. That was the charge which was brought against the Government, and it was one which he thought was worthy the consideration of the House. In the course of the correspondence to which he was referring, mention was made of Irish lotteries, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in a letter addressed to the secretary of the Scottish Reformation Society, directed him to apply to the Irish Office with reference to those lotteries. Three letters were accordingly addressed by the secretary of the Scottish Reformation Society to the Chief Secretary for Ireland on the 353 subject; but to those letters no reply-whatever was received—so that the right hon. Gentleman had acted towards the writer in a manner which could hardly be regarded as courteous. He had put Questions both to the Chief Secretary and to the Secretary for the Home Department in relation to these lotteries, and the replies which had been given to those Questions were, in his opinion, highly unsatisfactory. The Chief Secretary for Ireland seemed to think that the Roman Catholic lotteries were not at all illegal; while it appeared to be the opinion of the Secretary of State for the Home Department that, though illegal, they did not deserve to be prosecuted. In his reply the right hon. Gentleman said that these lotteries were like raffles held at bazaars; but there was a very wide difference between raffles at bazaars held for charitable purposes, and lotteries where the tickets were sold publicly, and commissions or allowances paid to those who could dispose of large quantities: but the question was not whether raffles at charitable bazaars were or were not illegal—it was certain that these Roman Catholic lotteries were illegal. Again, those lottery tickets were circulated under false pretences. It was impossible to ascertain from them that the lottery was for the benefit of Roman Catholic institutions. The word "Catholic," at all events, was not to be found on any of the tickets which had come under his notice. Again, these tickets held out a pretence that the lotteries were connected with the system of Art Unions, and it was thus endeavoured to persuade the public that they were perfectly legal under the Act of 1845. Now, it was by no means his intention to attack Art Unions; but he would remind the House that the late Sir Robert Peel expressed his dissatisfaction at Art Unions being legalized, and stated his opinion, since cited with approval by the Committee which investigated the subject in 1866, that, while the promoters of Art Unions supposed they were the promoters of art, they were in reality the promoters of gambling, and that, instead of elevating the public taste they had rather tended to lower it, while they had conferred very little benefit indeed on artists. His present object, however, was merely to show that these Roman Catholic lotteries did not come within the exemption in favour of Art Unions. 354 In the first place, an Art Union could not draw a lottery without the sanction of the Board of Trade, or, as an alternative, it must be incorporated by Royal Charter. Neither of these conditions, he presumed, would be found to exist in the case of these Roman Catholic lotteries. Again, the Act sanctioned no lotteries, unless they were for the distribution of drawings, paintings, and works of art exclusively; but certainly some of the prizes in Roman Catholic lotteries did not come within that category. He held in his hand a ticket connected with a lottery in support of St. Clare's Female Orphanage, Harold's Cross, Dublin, which the Lord Lieutenant had refused to suppress, although his attention had been drawn to it. Among the prizes enumerated were—"a hamper of the best wine," "a chest of black tea, containing 401b.," "a case of the best brandy," and "a barrel of the best sugar." These, certainly, were not works of art. Then, among the prizes in the lottery in support of St. Joseph's Orphanage, Mount-joy Street, Dublin, were—"a highly bred pony," "a hamper of wine," "a hamper containing a turkey," "a loaf of sugar," and "a gallon of Irish whisky." In another case it was announced that among the prizes there would be—"a pretty old cottage, freehold, value £75," "a stone-built cottage," and "a cottage and home forever, with a little garden." These, again, were certainly not works of art. The stone cottage, he might remark, was situate at Brailes, in Warwickshire, and it was added that it would give a vote for the county: the winner of the prize might, therefore, have a voice in the return of the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate). The vicar of Brailes stated that those cottages had been raffled for and put in lotteries more than once. That seemed to be a dishonest practice, and it was very strange that those cottages should always find their way back into the hands of the promoters of lotteries. With regard to the Roman Catholic Poor Schools in Homer Row, Marylebone, the secretary of the Scottish Reformation Society had drawn the attention of the Home Secretary to the illegal character of the lottery that was set on foot for the promotion of those schools, and had received a reply in the following terms 355 Whitehall, Feb. 14. "Sir,—With reference to your letter of the 11th instant, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Bruce to inform you that, in regard to the Homer Row Poor Schools' lottery, the Solicitor to the Treasury has been already instructed to take steps to prevent it. I am, &c, A. F. O. LIDDELL. Notwithstanding this intimation, the lottery continued to be advertised, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department, on being subsequently questioned in the House, said he would consider the matter, but rather thought a prosecution would not be necessary. This lottery had not yet been drawn, but had been postponed from the 7th of April to the 6th of June, and he hoped it would be prevented by the Government. Persons purchased tickets who had no interest whatever in the object for which those lotteries were got up, and it was clear, therefore, that they were actuated by a desire for gain, and the spirit of gambling. The effect of the action taken by the Lord Advocate in Scotland was that the illegal traffic had been stopped in that part of the kingdom, and a Roman Catholic Orphanage near Lanark, which cost upwards of £8,000, and was established chiefly by lotteries, admitted, in its report for 1869, that this hitherto proved resource had been put an end to. He asked the Government, therefore, either to enforce the law in England or to allow others to enforce it. It might be necessary to consolidate and amend the law, for there were no fewer than 12 Acts in force with regard to illegal lotteries; but if the Government thought the present law sufficient let them put it in force. If it were desirable to alter the law, and the Government did not think proper to introduce a Bill for that purpose, humble individual as he was, he would nevertheless be prepared to introduce a measure on the subject. He left the case in the hands of the House, feeling persuaded that it was their desire to secure an impartial administration of the law, and fair play and justices to all classes of Her Majesty's subjects.