§ MR. PULESTONasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he is prepared to adopt some scheme now to mitigate the evils likely to arise from the present action of the Government in annulling the provisions of the Contagious Diseases Acts?
THE MAEQUESS OF HARTINGTONThe action which I stated the other day the Government proposed to take is with, the view, not of annulling the provisions of the Contagious Diseases Acts, but of retaining as much of those provisions as we can reasonably expect to receive the support of the House in retaining. The Lock Hospital will remain, and the power of detention of women who are found to be diseased will also remain in force. I also stated that we are considering whether it will be possible to adopt any of the recommendations of the Royal Commission of 1871, which, in their opinion, might be applied, not only in these districts, but more generally with a prospect of improving the health of the troops and of the population generally.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLasked whether the statement of the noble Marquess, that the employment of the Metropolitan Police under these Acts was permissive, and not obligatory, was given after consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown?
THE MAEQUESS OF HARTINGTONIt was after consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown.
In answer to Sir R. ASSHETON GROSS,
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, that he had no control over local bodies of police. Over the Metropolitan Police, however, the Executive had authority; and the principle upon which the Executive had acted was that after the recent decision arrived at by the House they were bound to discontinue enforcing so much of the executive portion of the Acts as it was in their discretion to enforce or not to enforce. Of course, the word "police" in the Acts included the two classes of police, one being that over which the Executive Government had authority, and the other that over which they had no authority.
SIR E. ASSHETON CROSSwished to know whether the authorities over the local police had the power to exclude from the duties of that police the execution of the Acts in question?
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, that was a question upon which he would rather not give an opinion, as it was one with which he had nothing to do, and with respect to which he ought to say nothing regarding their legal rights, or the rights they might choose to exercise.
§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not quite follow his meaning, which was, whether there was any difference between statutory duties imposed upon the Metropolitan Police and statutory duties imposed on local police? If statutory duties could be withdrawn from the one body, why not from the other?
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid, that the local authorities were not under the same—what word should he use?—pressure from the House of Commons as the Executive Government was. The House of Commons had control over the Estimates from which the payment of the Metropolitan Police must come; and, consequently, the House could exert great pressure upon the Executive. The payment of the local police did not depend upon the Estimates, and thus the House could not exert the same pressure in the case of that body.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLobserved that, by the 15th and 16th sections of 29 Vict., c. 35, local Justices of the Peace might, on the information of a Superintendent of Police, order compulsory examination in a given locality. He asked whether the Government had the power to interfere with the discretion of the Justices of the Peace?
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTreplied, that he had no power, by Circular or otherwise, to interfere. If he were to give instructions to the local police they would not be bound to respect them. In local boroughs the autonomy with respect to the local police was absolute. The Secretary of State had a slight remnant of authority over the county police; but the local authorities were entirely independent of the Secretary of State.
MR. GORSTasked whether the House was to understand that no Vote would be proposed in the Estimates 42 with a view to the carrying out of the Acts?
THE MARQUESS OF HAETINGTONsaid, that it was the intention of the Government to substitute revised Estimates for the administration of the Acts, as he had already stated. When the Votes were moved there would be a convenient opportunity for discussing the matter.