Lords Sitting of 9 July 1844

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public—1a. Turnpike Acts Continuance; Stock in Trade; Charitable Loan Societies (Ireland); Customs Duties (Isle of Man); Militia Ballots Suspension.
2a. Bank of England Charter; Prisons (Scotland); Linen, etc. Manufactures (Ireland).
3a. and passed:—Marriages (Ireland); District Courts and Prisons; Parishes (Scotland).
Private.—1a. Monkland Railways (Wishaw and Coltness Railway).
2a. Lord Lovat's Estate.
Reported.—Ashton, Staleybridge, and Liverpool Junction Railway; Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway (Ashton-under-Lyne and Staleybridge Branch).
3a. and passed: — Cheape's Divorce (India); Eastern Union Railway; York United Gas; Holmfirth and Dunford Road.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Lords Brougham, and Campbell, from Rochdale, and 3 other places, in favour of the Disseuters Chapels Bill. — By Bishops of London, Norwich,

533
and Exeter, and Earls of Radnor, Fitzhardinge, Bandon, and Roden, from Ipswich, and several other places, against the Dissenters Chapels Bill.—From Aberdeen, for Legalizing Marriages solemnized by Presbyterian and Dissenting Ministers in Ireland. — From Abbey Strewry, and Fermoy, for the Extension of Scriptural Education in Ireland.—From Renfrew, against any Alteration in the present system of Banking in Scotland.—From Essex, respecting the Bank of England Charter Bill.—From Fishermen, and others of Inverary, against the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Bill.

DISSENTERS CHAPELS.
The Bishop of Exeterpresented several Petitions against the Dissenters Chapels Bill; one from some of the Baptists of Banbury, "praying their Lordships to postpone for six months, the consideration of the Commons Amendment." Now, he should certainly rejoice if the prayer of this Petition were acceded to. But if not, and if the question came to be whether the Bill as originally passed by their Lordships or the Bill as now altered by the Commons were preferable, he should decidedly vote in favour of the latter. He freely admitted that the Bill as thus altered came up strangely inconsistent with itself—grossly absurd—and utterly stultifying the decisions of their Lordships—greater and grosser stultifications of their Lordships' decisions never had occurred. Upon that point, however, he had not a strong feeling, for their Lordships' decisions were not always regarded in quarters where they might most reasonably be expected to find respect. His sensitiveness on that score then was small indeed. But the Bill as it had been altered greatly mitigated, inconsistent and absurd as it was, the iniquity of the measure as originally agreed to by their Lordships. When the Bill came before the Commons (he was aware he was not in order in alluding to what had passed there, but somehow or other their Lordships did become aware of it, and what had passed in their Lordships' House on the subject had been referred to in the other House), it had been a great argument in favour of the Bill that it should have received the approval of all the law Lords. Now as to the concurrence of the law Lords, if what he had gathered from the usual channels of information were correct (and really the country gained most of its information now-a-days from those sources), without wishing at all to undervalue the authority of those learned Lords—they did not concentrate in themselves all the learning of the law; and he could state that several of the most eminent Judges were adverse to the Bill. It might be said, indeed, that Judges were good authorities for what the law was, but not for
534
what it ought to be. ["Hear."] And he heard the observation cheered, nor did he wonder at it, but what then became of the authority, on the other side, of these law Lords, who, though not now judges, derived their authority from the fact of their having been so?—so that really the subject should be treated on its own merits. Now, if the reports published were correct as to what had passed in another place, the Bill as agreed to by their Lordships had been advocated by one of the most learned the ablest, and the clearest reasoners this country ever saw—the same learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General) whom their Lordships were so delighted to hear on the preceding night (in the arguments on the Writ of Error), and that learned, Gentleman recommended the measure on the ground upon which it had passed their Lordships' House—that where there were no express declarations of trust, then certain usage should be received as evidence of the objects of the trust. And it might have been expected, surely, that those who supported the measure would have done so on the same grounds as those thus taken by the Attorney General. Not so, however; for it appeared that a right hon. Gentleman, whom nobody knew in private without loving him—and nobody knew in public without respecting him—threw overboard those reasons for adherence to the measure, and said he supported it with no intention of having any specific doctrines to be taught, but on the principle of the "freedom of opinion," and upon this argument arose the Amendment, which essentially distinguished the Bill in its present from its previous form."
Lord Kinnaird Lord Kinnaird rose to order. He appealed to the House, whether the right rev. Prelate was justified in going at length into the discussion when the measure was not before the House, and he was only presenting a Petition.
The Bishop of Exetersaid, the Petition prayed their Lordships to postpone for six months the consideration of the Commons' Amendments; and he apprehended that, before moving that the Petition do lie on the Table, he had a right to show his reasons for that Motion.
The Earl of Shaftesburysaid, that there was no question before the House, and it would be extremely inconvenient if, on the mere presentation of a Petition, the whole subject was to be gone into, more particularly at the present moment.

BROTHELS SUPPRESSION BILL.
The Bishop of Exeter The Bishop of Exeter moved the Order of the Day for the third reading of the Bill for the more effectual Suppression of Bawdy Houses, and of the Trading in Seduction and Prostitution.
Lord Foleyexpressed a fear that any attempt to put such houses down by summary means would only lead to their transfer and re-establishment in other parts of the town, at present free from such nuisances. He thought the law as it at present stood, sufficient to abate the evil, but whether that were so or not, he feared that even if their Lordships passed this measure, they would find it impossible to carry its provisions into execution. He did not think the subject had undergone sufficient consideration, and he thought any measure on a subject so important should not have been brought forward without full inquiry. He should therefore, move as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months.
The Earl of Gallowayregretted that unexpected opposition to the Bill should have arisen at the eleventh hour, and sincerely hoped the advice of the noble Lord for its defeat would not be adopted. The affecting details with which the right rev. Prelate in so feeling a manner originally introduced the measure to the notice of the House, and the statements and arguments with which he had enforced—he might say, had demonstrated—its necessity, must be yet present to the minds of most of their Lordships. They were such as had induced their Lordships to give a second reading to the Bill, and to refer it to a Committee up stairs for revision. That Committee had given their attention to the subject at several sittings. He would mention, because he had heard mistaken comments on the subject, that they had been induced to alter the title of the Bill under legal advice, in order that it might be made to conform to the term already known to the law in respect of such subject: they had struck out several provisions which appeared to them to be objectionable, and unlikely to meet with the concurrence of the House, and they had amended others, and the Bill was now produced in a shape in which he (the Earl of Galloway) was of opinion it ought to pass, if their Lordships really wished to abate the evils complained of, if the House was serious and honest in its
536
desire to carry into effect the obvious intention of the law, as it already existed, but which had been found ineffectual for the purpose, by putting down, or at least by the attempt to suppress, as far as possible, those establishments, which were productive of so much sin and misery and crime, and had so pernicious an influence on the social condition of the people; if, moreover, they would extend protection to a comparatively helpless class, unable without the interposition of the Legislature, to protect themselves from the peculiar species of artifice and fraud which were practised against them, and if they would arrest the progress of abominations, alike disgraceful to a Christian country, and injurious to its best interests. Their Lordships were reminded in the preamble of the Bill, that by the 25th of George II., c. 36, Parliament had given encouragement for the prosecution of disorderly houses, under which terms were included both gaming houses and brothels; but the machinery enacted had been found too cumbrous, the process too dilatory, so that for the more ready suppression of the first—namely, the gaming houses—Parliament had been obliged to give additional powers, and offenders might be prosecuted under the terms of the Metropolitan Police Act, the 2nd and 3rd of Victoria, and dealt with by summary conviction before the Magistrate, who could impose a fine; or imprisonment with hard labour for a period—in duration, the double of that proposed for the first offence in the Bill before their Lordships. Now the supporters of this Bill contended that the demoralizing influence of brothels, and their evil consequences to society, were yet more extensive than those of gaming houses, and that no argument could have been brought for the suppression of the latter by summary process, which might not be made to apply with still greater force to the former. The noble Lord opposite having spoken in a rather low tone of voice, he (the Earl of Galloway) had been unable to gather the exact import of his objections to the measure before the House, but he understood him to ground his Motion of postponement on the necessity of previous enquiry—a regular Parliamentary enquiry, an enquiry by Commission, there certainly had not been, nor did he the (Earl of Galloway) think such to be either requisite on such a subject, or desirable, if it could be avoided.

537
The existence of houses of this description was notorious, and admitted on all hands, and nothing new to law was asked when their Lordships were invited only to give greater facilities for putting them down, a proposition which appeared to be most reasonable, when the odium was considered which attached to the process of their suppression, and the natural disinclination of respectable parties to be engaged in such a work, and it should be remembered, that innumerable offences were already dealt with by law in the mode proposed in this Bill, and that, moreover, there were already in existence the works of philanthropic individuals, and ample statistical reports of institutions established for the suppression of vice besides some collateral Parliamentary evidence, all showing the amount of the evils complained of, and the crimes which were perpetrated in these houses. This he could vouch for on the authority of a noble Lord present, who had read these works, and from a portion of one of the Reports, which he had read himself, though he trusted he should best consult the feelings of the House, as well as his own by abstaining from entering into particulars. But there was also a Clause intended to provide for the suppression of a system, which was emphatically called in the title of the Bill—the trading in seduction and prostitution; a system which he lamented to state, had been proved to be carried to a frightful extent of organization, both in our large towns and in the country, by which unprincipled parties pandered to the bad passions of their fellow-creatures by entrapping young women to their ruin—the dupes of every species of stratagem and combination; and often the merest children fall victims, and their own happiness and that of the families, with which they were connected, were blasted for ever. He was confident that in the whole catalogue of crime—speaking in a moral not a legal sense—there was not one which more loudly called for the interposition of the Legislature to put it down, nor with respect to which the country would be more grateful for such interposition. He would not occupy the attention of their Lordships with further observations. He commended the Bill to the Christian sympathies of the Houses, and especially to the good will and support of the Ministers of the Crown, that they might be instrumental in conferring
538
so great a boon on the country, that the Government might entitle itself to the gratitude of the community by making the magistrate, what he ought to be in matters of this kind—a terror to evil-doers. If the Bill should go down to the Commons with a unanimous vote of their Lordships' House, it would go down with a passport of recommendation, from which he should indulge the hope of its immediately passing into a law; and sure he was, if such should be the happy result, that however to some unreflecting minds it might appear among the least of the statutes of the Session, it would not be so regarded by the more reflecting portion of the community, and they might confidently hope the blessing of Heaven would attend it.
The Earl of Mintosaid, that he did not question the purity of the motives of the supporters of the Bill, but, notwithstanding the excellence of the object, he had some doubts with respect to the machinery by which that object was to be accomplished. He had taken the liberty some days ago of expressing a hope that the Government would take this matter into serious consideration, and be prepared at some future stage of the Bill to give the House some advice as to the course they should adopt on this subject. The Government had the best means of information, through the Commissioners of Police, both with respect to the extent of the evil, which all must deplore, and the probable operation of the measure now suggested, and it was extremely desirable that they should counsel the House as to the course that should be taken on this measure, which undoubtedly was one of a very grave character, which attempted to solve one of the most difficult questions of domestic regulation, and established new and summary penalties of a very stringent character.
The Duke of Wellingtonthanked the noble Earl for having given notice of the question he had now put. Having informed himself on the subject, he had now to state, that certainly the desire of the Government was very earnest to mitigate any evil resulting from the establishments alluded to; but there was a very strong feeling of the difficulty of carrying into execution such measures as were proposed in this Bill. It appeared to them that those measures were very stringent, and would require a variety of arrangements

539
to enable the Government and the magistracy to carry this Bill into execution, which measures certainly had not been sufficiently considered in that view, or even as to the propriety of adopting them, supposing there were the means of executing them. Under these circumstances, he recommended his right rev. Friend not to press the measure further on the consideration of the House.
The Bishop of Exeter,after what had fallen from the noble Duke, would be very sorry to press the Bill one moment longer on their Lordships' attention. He rejoiced to trace such expressions of sympathy on this subject from both sides of the House with respect to the object of this Bill, and he hoped that Government, seeing the great importance of the subject, would take it into their consideration with a view to the production of a measure next Session more likely to accomplish the end he had in view.
The Earl of Mountcashellregretted exceedingly that this Bill was about to be abandoned. The evils it was calculated to suppress were of the most alarming character, particularly the horrid trade in seduction, which was carried to an incredible extent in this metropolis, with respect to which he had a variety of horrors to detail, and which he would bring before the House Session after Session till some measure was carried similar to the present Bill. The longer that measure was delayed the more stringent its provisions must be made.
Bill withdrawn.
Their Lordships then proceeded with the further hearing of the arguments on the Writ of Error.
House adjourned.