§ Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Home Secretary whether he will grant the Return standing in the name of the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme? [Statute 34 Edward 3, c. 1,—Address for Return showing the number of occasions during the last thirty years that the Act of 34 Edward 3 has been invoked by the magistracy to demand security from persons against whom no charge was laid, and the number of occasions on which persons have been committed to prison for default of finding such security.—[Mr. Wedgwood.]
§ Mr. McKENNAUp to 1910 the annual judicial statistics have not distinguished between orders to find sureties of the peace made by Courts of Summary Jurisdiction on complaint when no offence has been charged and those made when an offence having been charged the Court, instead of convicting, made an order for sureties. But in 1910 it appears there were 6,847 orders of the first description, of which 313 were enforced by imprisonment and 8,116 of the second description, of which 159 were enforced by imprisonment. I should add that I am advised that the authority of the magistrates to require sureties of the peace, though mentioned and recognised 625 in the Statute of Edward III., depends on the general powers vested in them by virtue of the Commission.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs it not a fact that these people are not imprisoned under the Act of Edward III., but under some other Act?
§ Mr. McKENNAMagistrates have the power in the general powers of their Commission, but these general powers are recognised and referred to in the statute. They may, therefore, require sureties both under their general powers or under the statute.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDoes not the right hon. Gentleman know that it is the statute which gives them their powers as justices of the peace?
§ Mr. McKENNANo. The statute only recognises powers which already exist.