HL Deb 11 May 1869 vol 196 cc564-6

(The Marquess Townshend.)

Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.

THE MARQUESS TOWNSHEND moved that this Bill be now read the second time, describing its object to be to give power to two justices of the peace in petty sessions, or a police magistrate, to punish in a summary way persons convicted of assaults on females and children under fourteen years, occasioning actual bodily harm; and, under certain circumstances, to add to imprisonment the punishment of flogging. On one occasion he obtained the second reading of a similar measure in the House of Commons, though it failed to pass the further stages, and the Returns of the convictions which occurred under the present Act showed the necessity of a more stringent punishment. The punishment of the lash had been successfully applied to garotters, and these brutal offenders were even more deserving of it.

Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(The Marquess Townshend.)

THE EARL OF MORLEY

said, that while sympathizing with the noble Marquess's object, he did not believe the Bill would promote that object. The Preamble recited that the present law had been found inefficient for the protection of women and children; but he learnt from Sir Thomas Henry—than whom there could be no higher authority—that it was working satisfactorily, the number of offences against which it provided having materially diminished. In St. Giles's, and other poor districts of the metropolis, it was a common thing for a wife who was being beaten by her husband to bid him take care what he was doing, or he would get a "sixer," meaning six months' imprisonment; and this warning had a considerable effect. The Bill would require the testimony of two competent witnesses in case the aggrieved person was not examined, and this alone would render the measure in-operative, for in districts inhabited to a great extent by notorious criminals, where these offences were chiefly committed, it was difficult to get competent witnesses. He saw no reason why Fitzroy's Act of 1853 should be altered in this respect, nor why the evidence of a single constable should not suffice. He objected also to authority being given to a magistrate, on summary conviction, to sentence offenders to flogging; for such sentences required great care and discretion, and the natural indignation of a magistrate might induce him to impose such a punishment—which at present he could only do in the case of juvenile offenders—without sufficient consideration. Such a punishment, moreover, would excite vindictive feelings on the part of a husband towards his wife; for whereas, in case of imprisonment, he might often be released on her petition—in which case there was ground for hoping that better feelings would influence him—she could never unflog him. On obtaining his liberty he would be likely, therefore, to abandon her altogether. Moreover, the reluctance to prosecute which at present existed would be much increased. The Bill, again, would allow an appeal. Now this Mould be seldom resorted to, and no sufficient reason had been shown for altering the Act of 1853. He moved that the Bill be read a second time this day three mouths.

An Amendment moved to leave out ("now") and insert ("this day six months.'")—(The Earl of Morley.)

THE MARQUESS TOWNSHEND

, in reply, admitted that the Act of 1853 was a great improvement, but contended that for extreme cases the maximum punishment of six months' hard labour was insufficient. The number of these offences, in comparison with other countries, was a disgrace to England. The power of appeal would be a protection against hasty sentences; and as to the desertion of the wives, they would be better off if they did not see their husbands again. The requirement of two witnesses was an inadvertence which he should be willing to remedy, as he did not wish to deviate from the present Act on this point. He could not consent to withdraw the Bill.

EARL DE GREY AND RIPON

hoped the noble Marquess would not press for a division, since the House could not pass the second reading in the face of Sir Thomas Henry's testimony to the efficiency of the present law.

On Question, That ("now") stand part of the Motion? Resolved in the negative; and Bill to be read 2a on this day six months.