HL Deb 10 May 1883 vol 279 cc371-7
LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE

said, he rose to call attention to a para- graph in the "Times" of the 3rd instant, relative to orders, stated to have been given by Her Majesty's Government to the police not to enforce the Contagious Diseases Acts at Chatham and other places; and to inquire whether such was the case; and, if so, on what grounds Her Majesty's Government had discontinued to carry out an Act of Parliament? The paragraph to which he referred stated that the intelligence that the Acts were not to be enforced had been received with dismay at Portsmouth, Plymouth, Chatham, and other stations. It appeared, in consequence of the recent Resolution of the House of Commons, that it was not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to enforce the Acts in the same way as hitherto. The Government had also made the statement that they could not do so, because of the probability that the House of Commons, having passed a certain Resolution, would not, in all probability, agree to the Vote in Supply necessary for carrying out the Acts. For his own part, he thought it almost impossible that the other House of Parliament would not agree to grant the Supplies necessary for carrying out an Act of Parliament which was in existence. If, however, such a policy were to be adopted, what would be the result? It would, in fact, amount to this—that the House of Commons would be setting aside an Act of Parliament, and the whole Constitution of the country would come to an end. A policy of that kind would be most dangerous, and he, for one, would enter his protest against it.

THE EARL OF NORTHBROOK

said, that the statement referred to by the noble Lord was substantially correct. As their Lordships were probably aware, the House of Commons, by a majority, had arrived at a conclusion against the compulsory examination of women under the Contagious Diseases Acts. Under these circumstances, the Government had considered which course it would be best to take. They found that the action necessary under the Acts was in the main permissive, and not obligatory. Therefore they thought that, under the circumstances, it was desirable no longer to employ the Metropolitan Police for the purpose of carrying out the compulsory clauses of the Acts, in regard to examination. Indeed, the carrying out of the Acts at all depended upon the monies provided by Parliament. The Vote for the year had not yet been introduced; and his noble Friend must see that, as a practical question, it was impossible to expect the other House of Parliament to vote any sums for the purpose of carrying out compulsory examination, seeing that they had deliberately come to the conclusion—not by a snatch vote, as had been said, but by a majority of 72—against the operation of that portion of the Act. It had accordingly been decided to withdraw the Metropolitan Police from the duty of carrying out that portion of the Act, and at a later period of the Session to introduce a Bill modifying the Acts, retaining only those portions which referred to voluntary submission, and leaving out the compulsory examination. He believed that the action the Government had decided on taking was almost the only practicable course under the circumstances.

THE EARL OF HARDWICKE

said, that the noble Earl laboured under some difficulty in answering the Question that had been put to him. He had told them that the Government intended to bring in a Bill to change the law; but, looking at the state of Public Business, it seemed improbable that any such Act of Parliament could be passed this Session. If that were so, the Government were practically surrendering the powers of the Executive into the hands of a body of gentlemen who were, no doubt, actuated by the most Christian-like feelings in wishing to alter an Act of Parliament, which, he ventured to say, was one of the most beneficial and charitable measures that ever had been passed. When these Acts were first introduced into Parliament, it was the most anxious desire of the then Executive Government that they should be passed in order to prevent the contamination of a large body of the people by men in the Naval and Military Services of the country. Those Acts had been most beneficial to the community at large, and he thought it most unwise, and, indeed, most illegal, for the Government, in obedience to a snatch vote in the other House of Parliament, to abrogate the most useful part of those Statutes. The question was one of a painful character, and one that had invariably been slurred over by Parliament when it happened to be brought under discussion. The illustrious Duke (the Duke of Cambridge) knew perfectly well how the Act of 1866 had worked. Wherever it had been in force, the advantage had been most marked. He ought to tell the noble Earl the First Lord of the Admiralty that he (the Earl of Hardwicke) had always thoroughly endorsed the operation of the Acts. His noble Friend the Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of Hartington), when the question was brought forward by Mr. Stansfeld, had also endorsed the operation of the Acts. But what had been the course of Ministers since? Although the Prime Minister admitted that the question was one of great difficulty, and one over which Ministers themselves were divided, yet he had chosen a course of policy which, to his mind, ought to be resisted by their Lordships. He had letters in his pocket from a gentleman in the Naval Service, who was at present residing at Portsmouth. These letters had been given to him by Sir H. Drummond Wolff; and they had been slightly alluded to in the speech of that Gentleman made in the House of Commons 10 days ago. To him these letters seemed so intrinsically important that he would take the liberty of reading from them one or two extracts. The first letter—dated 5th March, said— I think it is right you should know what a strong feeling exists in this place amongst men of all shades of political opinion in favour of retaining the Contagious Diseases Acts in their integrity. The abolition of compulsory examination will virtually annul the Acts, and will certainly deprive them of their efficiency. A strong remonstrance from the leading inhabitants has been prepared, and it is in course of signature. The writer added— The moral tone of this place is immensely improved since the Acts have been in operation. I allude to the moral tone, because those philanthropic gentlemen who have addressed Parliament argue that it is against the principles of morality, and the instincts of a Christian nation, that such Acts should exist. We anticipate the most disastrous results if the Acts are abolished, or so modified as to do away with compulsory examination. Then the writer alluded to the number of unfortunate women who had been rescued by means of the Acts. That, he might say, represented the general feeling throughout the country—not only at Portsmouth, but at the whole of the towns brought under the operation of these Acts. He had, at the same time, to express grave doubts whether the Government was legally justified in the course it was pursuing. Their Lordships had nothing to do with the necessary payments for carrying out the Acts. If the question had been brought up when the Estimates were brought forward it would have been properly discussed. That would have been a proper opportunity for Members to take part in the debate, and the question would not have been disposed of in the manner of which they had cognizance. In conclusion, he would express a strong hope that Her Majesty's Government would, in the discharge of a great public duty, give earnest consideration to the question whether they should not further inquire into this matter before they attempted to repeal these Acts.

THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE

My Lords, I do not desire to prolong the discussion upon this painful, though most important subject. I must, however, say that these Acts have done far more good than people out-of-doors suppose, and that the physical and moral benefits which they have conferred upon the community at large, as well as upon the Navy and the Army, are enormous. It is perfectly true, as has been stated, that public opinion, in all places where these Acts have been applied, is uniformly in favour of their continuance. That being the case, it appears to me to be an extraordinary thing that it should be proposed to sweep away these Acts at once without more full discussion of the subject. I frankly admit that the question is a most difficult one; but I pray your Lordships not to allow these most beneficial measures to be swept away, simply because there has been a discussion in the other House which has led to a vote which, it now appears, will do away with the compulsory powers of the Statutes, and thereby effect a change in them which will greatly modify their useful effect. I am aware that this is a very disagreeable subject to speak upon; but I must repeat that more good has resulted from these Acts than is generally supposed, and I trust, therefore, that they will not be repealed without the fullest further consideration. I can assure your Lordships that I do not advocate the continuance of these Acts merely on the ground that they are most beneficial to the Service with which I am connected, but because I conscientiously believe that they are of immense advantage to the community at large, and more especially to the unfortunate creatures who come under their operation, numbers of whom have been rescued from their unhappy life solely through the medium of these Statutes. I should wish it to be thoroughly understood that the moral effect of the Acts has been very great.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

said, he did not rise to say one word on the question of the policy of the Acts, or of the alteration in regard to them in consequence of the vote in the House of Commons. But, as the noble Earl (the Earl of Hardwicke) had suggested that there was illegality in the course which the Government had taken since that vote was given, he would say a word in explanation. Undoubtedly, it was not in the power of the Government, without an Act of Parliament, to suspend the operation of any Act of Parliament enforced at the time being, and the Government had not taken upon themselves to do so. The only matters of obligation cast upon the Government by the Act of Parliament was that the Admiralty or the War Office should appoint medical officers for certain purposes, to act in certain hospitals; but he could not discover in the Acts any direct obligation laid on Government, either expressly or by necessary implication, to take active steps with the view of putting in force those powers of the Acts which had reference to the compulsory examination of certain persons taking place. The power of compulsory examination depended upon an order of a Justice of the Peace, which order might be made when information on oath was laid before him by a Superintendent of Police and supported by certain proofs. The Government had not, and could not, take upon themselves to prevent any Justice of the Peace from acting in the manner authorized by the Acts upon information laid by a Superintendent of Police; and there was nothing in the Acts which imposed upon the Government the duty of using any powers which they possessed to set in motion the police authorities for that purpose. Undoubtedly, so long as there was no vote passed by the House of Commons adverse to the operation of this part of the Acts, it was perfectly right that the Government should take measures, by the special employment of police, to see that the Acts were put in operation when they thought that public advantage would result from it; but when the House of Commons passed a vote expressing an opinion, by a large majority, that there should not be compulsory examination, the Government were, at all events, not transgressing any part of the enactments, nor were they neglecting any obligation directly laid on them by the Acts, if they abstained from taking active means contrary to the Resolution of the House of Commons.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, he was a little surprised at the doctrine laid down by the Lord Chancellor. It seemed to him to lead rather further than he contemplated. He understood that the action of the Government would prevent the police from laying those informations which were necessary to carry these Acts into operation. If that was the case, it was obvious that by the vote of the House of Commons it was practicable to suspend the operation of the whole Criminal Law of the land, so far as it depended upon the action of the police setting the provisions in motion. He could hardly imagine that the noble and learned Earl would lay down so large a doctrine as that, and he hoped to listen to some qualification of it from him.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

said, he did not lay down any such doctrine as that attributed to him. The Government had not power to prevent the police in those parts of the country from taking such measures as they might think fit to bring charges before the magistrates. What the Government had power to do, and certainly what they did, was to abstain from taking active measures on their own part to cause the police to make those charges.

THE EARL OF HARDWICKE

said, he thought the noble and learned Earl did not understand what the Government had done, because the result of their action was the withdrawal of the Metropolitan Police, who were the people appointed to investigate what was going on. That was the whole gist of the matter. The withdrawal of the money had nothing to do with the action of the magistrates, or with the unfortunate persons who were brought before them, but with the detective force.