HL Deb 23 July 1874 vol 221 cc542-3

Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.

LORD COLCHESTER

, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that under the existing law, if a woman was charged with having wilfully caused the death of her child during or immediately after its birth, she must either be found guilty of murder or acquitted. The consequence was that juries were frequently unwilling to return a verdict of "Wilful Murder" in cases in which there could be no doubt that women had caused the death of their children on the ground that there was no positive proof that the child was born alive. This Bill, in consequence, proposed to make the infliction of serious bodily harm, when the child subsequently died, a felony, punishable with penal servitude for any term not exceeding 10 years, or with imprisonment for any term not exceeding two years. By clause 4, if a woman was acquitted of the murder of her child, the jury might find her guilty of the felony mentioned in this Bill.

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

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

said, that without stating his objection to the principle of the Bill, he must take exception to the wording. If a woman should "wilfully cause" the death of her child after its birth, he did not see how that could be anything but murder.

LORD PENZANCE

said, he must express his concurrence with his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack.

LORD REDESDALE

had a great objection on principle to such Bills as this. Killing a child was as much murder as killing a grown-up person. The effect of a Bill of this kind would be to make people think it was not murder if the child was killed at the time of birth or just after it, and the consequence would be an encouragement to child murder, and not a repression of it.

LORD SELBORNE

also had an objection to a special verdict of the kind contemplated by this Bill. He could not but think there would be much difficulty in such a verdict in a criminal case. He very much doubted the wisdom of this legislation, but he was unwilling to reject the Bill, as it had received the assent of the other House of Parliament.

On Question? Resolved in the Affirmative.

Bill read 2a accordingly.