Lords Sitting of 26 February 1861

HOUSES OF ILL-FAME BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDin moving the second reading of this Bill said, that the object of the measure was of the simplest possible character. It did not propose to alter the aspect of the law with regard to those places in any respect, but merely to make the existing law more easily effectual than it was at present. By the existing law houses of this kind could be indicted, and upon the order of the Judge the expenses thereby incurred could be charged upon the county fund. But the proceedings, which must be taken under an old Act of Parliament, were of such a description that it was exceedingly difficult to carry the law into effect. For example, it was necessary that two householders should prosecute, and they could only do so as common informers, receiving a reward of £10 each upon obtaining a conviction. Of course, this gave a character to the proceeding of a very different kind from that which ought to be attached to it, and a strong and general objection was entertained to undertaking any such prosecution. The offence was, indeed, one of a series of misdemeanours in which the costs were allowed by statute, and the law had provided ways by which when an evil of the kind became unbearable the parties should be indicted. He, therefore, proposed to add no new ground of indictment, but only so to simplify the process that the existing law should be carried out and made more practically effective, and the costs allowed by proper authority be recovered. He need not enter into the general question which was dealt with by the Bill. Hitherto the law had regarded these wretched houses as evils which were in one sense "necessary evils"— that was to say evils that could not be altogether suppressed. Our Legislature, however, had avoided the great moral evil which attends
  in other countries the licensing of those houses and bringing them under the direct shadow of the law; but it had considered that since those houses could not be altogether suppressed they should be discouraged to the utmost, and that the law should be ready whenever those houses pressed themselves on public notice to bring its penalties to bear upon them. He did not ask them to make any difference whatever as to the status of those houses, but merely to simplify the mode by which the majesty of the law should be properly upheld. As he had no reason to anticipate any objection would be made to the second reading of the Bill he had only briefly stated its details.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORwas sure that the House felt greatly indebted to the right rev. Prelate for having directed his attention to this question with the view of suppressing what was undoubtedly a serious evil. The existing law did not deal with these cases effectually, and it was desirable that it should be amended. But whilst there was no objection to the principle of the Bill, he apprehended that as it would involve a charge upon the public revenue, it would be considered a taxing Bill, and the House of Commons would decline to receive it if it originated in this House. He would, therefore, recommend its withdrawal: if not, he should feel it his duty to move that it be read a second time that day six months.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, be had not been aware that there was any such technical objection against the measure; but if it was the opinion of the House that it ought not to originate there he would accede to the request of the noble and learned Lord and withdraw it.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn; then the Bill (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

  PROTECTION OF FEMALE CHILDREN BILL.—SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDmoved the second reading of this Bill, which, he said, was similar to one that passed their Lordships' House two years ago, but too late in the Session to go to the other House. The Bill consisted of but one clause, and was of the simplest kind. At present the law gave protection to young girls between the ages of ten and twelve,

  931
  and the seduction of such children was declared a misdemeanor. The object of this Bill was to extend the age by one year, so that it should be thirteen instead of twelve; and the only argument against it, he believed, was that by the old law of England females were enabled to marry at the age of twelve, and that, therefore, it was something of a contradiction to extending the protection beyond that age. But the evil was practically a very great one. Young girls were sent forth from the unions at thirteen years of age perfectly ignorant of the way in which they would be tempted, and of the life that was before them. He thought the law would, therefore, do well to extend its protection to them as female children, until they arrived at the age when they would be fit to be set free from it.
  LORD CRANWORTHfelt that such cases as had been alluded to by his right rev. Friend were indeed very deplorable, but he doubted whether they could fix any age at which there might not be some cases from which the same argument might be drawn. It appeared to him extremely desirable to avoid discussions of this kind, which were not only unpleasant but extremely detrimental to morality.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
  LORD DENMANthought that the Bill should fix the age at fourteen instead of thirteen.
  EARL GRANVILLE,agreeing with the noble and learned Lord below that these discussions were more mischievous than otherwise, moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
  Amendment moved, to leave out("now") and insert ("this Day Six Months.")
  On Question, That ("now") stand part of the Motion, their Lordships divided:— Contents 27; Not Contents 48: Majority 21; and Bill to be read 2a this Bay Six Months.

CASE OF MR. TURNBULL.

  MOTION POSTPONED.
  On Notice of Motion (the Marquess of NORMANBY) respecting the resignation of Mr. Turnbull;—
  LORD MONTEAGLEhoped that the noble Marquess would not proceed with the Motion that evening. The subject to which it had reference was a very interesting one. It involved a question of personal character as well as of a public principle of considerable importance, and he submitted that it would be unfair to press
  932
  its discussion until their Lordships had time to read the papers in reference to it. Those papers had been presented only at five o'clock that evening. They were not even printed, and he doubted whether there was a single individual in the House who had read them. He could say for himself that he knew nothing whatever of their contents, and he did not think that, in justice to the subject itself the noble Marquess should proceed with its discussion that evening. It involved not only a question of personal conduct and character, but also of freedom of conscience, and the conduct of an eminent Judge and of the Government—to say nothing of the important public question that was connected with the matter; but not knowing what the contents of the papers were, he should say that he was not prepared to give a vote on the Motion. On that ground he appealed to the noble Marquess to postpone his Motion until the papers were printed, or until the House had the opportunity of reading them.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYsaid, that he was placed in a position of considerable difficulty by the appeal which had been made to him by his noble Friend. In the first place it was impossible not to yield attention to any suggestion coming from the noble Lord whose whole political life, if he had not assured them of that fact, was a guarantee of the very great and deep interest which he took in such questions. But before he acceded to the request of his noble Friend he should make one or two observations. He thought himself that the papers were very important to the proper discussion of the subject, and that it would be a disadvantage to himself, although well knowing their contents, if it were to be entered on before their Lordships had read them. He believed also that some other very important documents which the Protestant Alliance had not thought expedient to publish in their last monthly Report, though then in their possession, would be presented to the House, and that they were documents which contained the opinions on the subject of many important official persons in the Record Office. With regard, however, to the postponement of the Motion he was in this difficulty. Their Lordships would recollect the sort of attack to which he had been exposed the other day by the noble Earl below the cross benches (Earl of Shaftesbury), who then told him that he had acted in a most unfair manner

  933
  because he had postponed the Motion of which he had given notice a few days he-fore. He had given that notice in consequence of the number of letters which he had received directing his attention to the public correspondence between Mr. Turn-bull and the Master of the Rolls, after he had called the attention of the House to a very singular and extraordinary use made of the appellation of "Christians" in a memorial which had emanated from the self-same Protestant Alliance in reference to some alleged persecution of Protestants in Spain, and in regard to which the noble Earl gave a very imperfect explanation. He had been charged by the noble Lord with having acted unfairly in postponing that Motion; but he had previously stated to the noble Earl his intention to postpone it long before he had publicly done so in the House. The reason why he postponed the Motion was that he was informed that a certain memorial, signed by as many as 800 Protestants was about to be presented to the Prime Minister, praying that Mr. Turnbull's resignation might not be accepted; and Mr. Turnbull's friends suggested that the Motion should be postponed until they saw the result of the appeal to Lord Palmerston. The noble Earl then said that he knew what his motives were, and that the object was that meanwhile another Gentleman in "another place" should attack him behind his back. He (the Marquess of Normanby) protested his entire ignorance that any such Motion was contemplated in the House of Commons, and that any such formidable champion of Mr. Turnbull was about to attack the noble Earl there. But these facts placed him now in a delicate position as to again postponing the Motion, since he had assured the noble Earl that he would bring it forward at the earliest opportunity. At the same time, he felt that it would not be fair to refuse compliance with the appeal just made. As this was a matter which he had been told affected personal character be could not delay it a day later than was necessary, and would, therefore, postpone until Monday his Motion on Italian affairs and bring forward this subject in its place on Friday. He could not, however, help complaining of the delay which had taken place in the production of these papers, He moved for them on Thursday. They were ready in the Rolls Office, as he was informed, on Friday, and yet the requisite older for their presentation never left the Home Office until after the House
  934
  adjourned last night. When their Lordships remembered the necessity of a fair, full, and speedy consideration of this question, he thought they had reason to complain of this default of duty on the part of one of the departments of the Government.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he did not think the noble Marquess need make any complaint on that score, as he had himself declared that the papers were of no importance.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYwas surprised that the noble Earl should make such a statement. He had observed that he was acquainted with the facts, and that the papers were not, therefore, necessary for his information; but other noble Lords thought them of great importance, because they knew nothing of the case. With regard to the time of postponing his Motion, he now understood that some noble Lords who were anxious to attend the discussion on Italian affairs would not be able to do so if it were delayed until next week. He would, therefore, allow his notice on this subject to stand, as before, for Friday, and would fix the present Motion respecting Mr. Turnbull's case for next Monday.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, to Thursday next, Half-past Ten o'clock.