Lords Sitting of 8 August 1884

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Disused Burial Grounds* (249).
Second Reading—Cholera, &c. Protection* (247).
Committee—Report—Revenue, &c.* (242).
Third Reading—Municipal Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices)* (212); Prosecution of Offences* (233); Criminal Lunatics* (239–250); Superannuation* (235), and passed.

LAW AND JUSTICE—THE ASSIZES— THE ROYAL PROCLAMATION AGAINST IMMORALITY AND VICE.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYasked the Lord Chancellor, Whether it is the fact that Her Majesty's Government have given their approval to the abolition of the ancient custom of reading the Royal Proclamation against immorality and vice on the occasion of the opening of the Assizes by Her Majesty's Judges?
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that, in answer to the Question of the noble Earl, he had to state, in the first place, that a Council of Judges was held on the 10th June last, at which, amongst other things, it was unanimously agreed by the Judges present to recommend Her Majesty, by Order in Council, to abolish the necessity of reading the Proclamation against vice and immorality; and in consequence of that intimation from the Judges an Order in Council had been recently made giving effect to it. That Order contained these words—

  253
  "Henceforth it shall not be necessary to read or proclaim in Court at any Assize the Royal Proclamation against vice and immorality heretofore accustomed to be read or proclaimed."
  Their Lordships would not require him to tell them that it was not from any want of a due sense of the importance of discouraging vice and immorality that the Judges made that recommendation, or that Her Majesty in Council had acceded to it. The reasons which led the Judges to make that recommendation were, that the ceremony of reading the Proclamation, though it was not a very long document, had a tendency, with other things, in some degree to diminish the time available for the business of the Court; secondly, that it was not read, as a general rule, in such a manner as to be likely to operate as a practical admonition to the audience in Court to follow the paths of piety and virtue; and, thirdly—which was, indeed, the chief reason—that it was an anachronism, because it commanded the Judges strictly to enforce certain prohibitions and injunctions, as to which there was no law in existence, and, consequently, which could not be enforced. Among the prohibitions was one against the
  "Playing of dice, cards, or any other game whatsoever in public or private houses on the Lord's Day;"
  and one of the injunctions was that all the Queen's subjects, of whatever class or degree, should decently and reverently attend the worship of God every Lord's Day. Much as he sympathized with the spirit of these Orders, he was not aware of any law by which they could be enforced. He need only add that, besides these instances, the Proclamation, which originated in the time of Charles II.—a period not conspicuous for the practical discouragement of vice and immorality—contained other things which were not suited to the state of the law at the present time; and, in these circumstances, it was considered that the reading of it would not have the salutary effect which it was intended to have.
  LORD BRAMWELL, speaking from his experience as a Judge of Assize, said, he thought it undesirable that the Proclamation should continue to be read. It originated in the Reign of Charles II., and continued unaltered until 1860, when some modification was made in it which made it less unreasonable; but
  254
  still it contained many things that were objectionable. It prohibited all Her Majesty's subjects, of whatever degree or quality soever, from playing on the Lord's Day at dice, cards, or any other game whatsoever, either in public or in private houses, or other place or places whatsoever; and it required and commanded them, decently and reverently, to attend the worship of God on every Lord's Day; and it further strictly charged and commanded all Her Majesty's Judges, Mayors, Sheriffs, Justices of the Peace, and all other Her Officers and Ministers, both ecclesiastical and civil, and all other Her subjects whom it might concern, to be very vigilant and strict in the discovery and the effectual prosecution and punishment of all persons who should be guilty of dissolute, immoral, or disorderly practices; and that they took care also effectually to suppress all public gaming houses and places, and lewd and other disorderly houses; and also to suppress and prevent all gaming whatsoever in public or private houses on the Lord's Day. It would be seen, therefore, that it ordered many things to be abstained from which were not prohibited by law, and it ordered Judges and others to do things contrary to law, and which they had no means of doing if lawful. The result was that the injunctions contained in the Proclamation were constantly disregarded. The Cleric of the Assize, or his officer, felt that, although he had to read it, he did not like it, and, as a consequence, generally gabbled over it in an undertone, the result being that it was scarcely heard, and so much of the Proclamation as reached the public only called forth a titter and laugh. Was that desirable? He thought that it was not, and that it was better, under the circumstances, to abolish the reading of the Proclamation. If a well-drawn Royal Proclamation against immorality and vice befitting the solemn occasion were read at the opening of the Assizes, he could see no objection to it; but the present one was certainly objectionable, and it was better that it should be suppressed. He, therefore, thought the Judges were justified in recommending its discontinuance.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that he had asked the Question merely to put himself in possession of the facts of the matter. He would admit that the question was a difficult one, and there was

  255
  no doubt that the doing away with the Proclamation altogether had caused alarm to many persons. The noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack had stated that the original Proclamation was amended in 1860, and the noble and learned Lord opposite (Lord Bramwell) had stated that a well-drawn address in its stead would not only not be objectionable, but desirable. That showed that further consideration should be given to the matter. He did not think the matter ought to drop, and, therefore, he would suggest whether it should not be considered during the Recess, with a view to the reading of the Proclamation being continued in some modified form which would secure the object in view. He gave Notice that he should return to the subject after the Recess.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNinquired by whose authority the Proclamation had been suppressed?
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the recommendation was unanimously made by all the Judges at a general Council, and that recommendation was submitted to Her Majesty, and she thought fit to pass an Order in Council.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYasked the Lord Chancellor, if he understood correctly that the noble and learned Earl would accept an amended Proclamation?
  THE LORD CHANCELLORreplied, that he did not intend to express an opinion adverse to that; but this was the first time the subject had been presented.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYthought it was a serious matter, and he should ask the Lord Chancellor hereafter the result of his mature consideration of the point.

CENTRAL ASIA—THE AFGHAN BOUNDARY COMMISSION.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD FORBES, who had a Notice on the Paper to ask Her Majesty's Government for some information regarding the Afghan Boundary Commission, said, that the problem which had to be solved in Central Asia had, for a long time, been a matter of very deep interest, coupled with some considerable amount of anxiety, distrust, and fear. The advance of Russia in Central Asia had been
  256
  of a steady character, and he had seen it stated that she was now within 110 miles of Herat. For the safety of the Indian Empire it was evident that some period should be put to that advance, beyond which it could go no further. He would like to put four Questions to Her Majesty's Government. The first was, whether they had been in direct correspondence with Russia in regard to the boundary line, beyond which Russia should not go; secondly, whether it would be possible for Her Majesty's Government to lay on the Table of the House a map showing the boundary line proposed? Thirdly, he wished to know, supposing a boundary line were drawn, what penalties would attach to the transgression of that line; and, fourthly, he would ask for some information as to the numbers of the escort which was to accompany the Boundary Commission? They were told that it was to consist of 100 Infantry and the same number of Cavalry. It seemed to him that such a force was a very inadequate representation of their interests in the matter. As he had said, the question was one of very great importance; because it was quite certain that Russia could not keep on advancing as she was without at some point coming in contact with British interests, when serious complications would arise; and the object of all good legislation was not merely to legislate for themselves and the present time only, but for those who came after them, and for their benefit.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he thought that the noble Lord had adopted a somewhat unusual form of proceeding in placing a Notice on the Paper asking for "some information," which was a vague term. The noble Lord had then proceeded to a still more unusual proceeding—namely, ask four Questions of which no Notice had been given. He should have been perfectly justified in declining to answer the noble Lord without Notice; but he did not wish to shield himself under that plea, although he was not able to give much imformation. As to the first question, his reply was, certainly; Her Majesty's Government had been in correspondence with the Russian Government concerning the North-West frontier of Afghanistan. As to the question of laying a map on the Table of the House as the noble Lord

  257
  had suggested, the request was so extraordinary as to cause him to smile, for he thought that when they were entering upon negotiations with respect to a frontier, it would be a very unusual proceeding to lay such a map on the Table beforehand, showing what they proposed to do in the matter. Nothing could be more imprudent. As to the third Question, the noble Lord might as well ask what penalty would be enforced for any breach of International Law. It might result in the breaking off of friendly diplomatic relations, war, or other things; but he declined to enter into any discussion of that contingency. As to the force which would accompany the Commissioners, he had to say that the subject had not been finally determined; but he thought it probable that the escort would consist of something like the number to which the noble Lord referred. It would, he thought, be sufficient for the purpose; but the question was still under consideration. The noble Lord had not asked him one Question which he should have been glad he had mentioned. It was, what was the position of affairs generally? They had been in communication both with the Russian Government and with the Ameer, and the Government of India. The Ameer desired and approved the Commission; but communications were still going on. So far, however, the matter had made satisfactory progress.

COMMERCIAL NEGOTIATIONS WITH TURKEY AND JAPAN.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he will lay on the Table, before the Prorogation of Parliament, any Papers explanatory of the commercial proposals made by this country to the Governments of Turkey and Japan? He said it was extremely desirable that the commercial community should be put in possession of more thorough information as to the schemes of the Government with regard to those negotiations than it at present possessed. He hoped the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) would be able to assure their Lordships that the Chambers of Commerce of the country were being consulted with regard to the negotiations. He would also be glad if the noble Earl
  258
  could tell him, for the sake of the commercial community, whether there was any power introduced into the Treaties to give a renunciation after a certain period. It was impossible to overrate the importance of those Commercial Treaties, and the commercial community were watching, with very great anxiety, to see whether Her Majesty's Government were throwing themselves with real zeal into these commercial matters. The commercial community had had grave reason for suspicion in past times as to the real anxiety of the Government on those important topics. He thought he need hardly refer to the great disappointment felt at the failure of the French Treaty negotiations, which had been referred to as being of the greatest gravity in three Queen's Speeches. The commercial community had also reason to complain as to the manner in which the negotiations connected with the Suez Canal had been conducted. They had been conducted in such a way as to oblige the Government to give them up, the commercial community being asked to bring them to a conclusion at which Her Majesty's Government had failed to arrive. Lately, again, the commercial community had had grave reason for suspicion in regard to the Congo Treaty, and as to whether the Government rightly and properly realized the gravity of the subject. He confessed he was somewhat alarmed by the concluding remarks of the short speech delivered by the noble Earl the other night, when he took a most optimist view of the commerce of this country. If that optimist view prevailed to a large extent in the Government, he thought it might account somewhat for the failure of former commercial negotiations. Those who were most interested—whether traders or operatives—in every part of the country, were getting more and more susceptible as to the treatment by the Government of those commercial matters. They entertained grave suspicions that Her Majesty's Government did not rightly appreciate the gravity of these subjects. He trusted, therefore, that the Government would not only make every possible effort during the Recess to bring the proposals alluded to in his Question to a satisfactory conclusion; but that they would also, during the progress of negotiations, lay full information on the Table, so as to enable commercial

  259
  communities to assist and co-operate with them.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Harrowby) has noticed several topics which were not quite apparent in the Notice he has given. With regard to the laying of Papers and Returns on the Table as to the commercial proposals between the Government and Japan and Turkey, I should have thought the noble Earl, from his great official and Parliamentary experience, and from his connection with one of the largest commercial cities in this country, would have been aware that it was extremely unusual and extremely undesirable, while negotiations were going on, to produce those negotiations, not only for ourselves, but for the whole world. I stated the other day that instructions had been sent out, and that our Ministers were in active communication with the Government of Japan on the subject, and that the delay was owing to the instructions from other countries, over whom we have no control, not having arrived; and, under those circumstances, it would not be convenient to produce Papers describing the stages of the negotiations, some of which we are not really at present acquainted with. With regard to Turkey, I can speak in a still stronger way. The noble Earl seems to think that the commercial classes are much more anxious than we are to prevent injudicious arrangements, and that we should present Papers before it is wise to do so. I may mention that delegates have been appointed, and are sitting at this moment, on the Turkish Tariff. They object in the strongest manner to the publication which the noble Earl requires; and Sir Joseph Lee, who represents Manchester, also strongly objects to the publication of those Papers at this moment as being most injudicious. I must entirely repudiate the statement of my noble Relative, that the Foreign Office is lukewarm as to the interest of the commercial community, and that it declines to secure commercial advantages to this country. At the same time, I must also repeat that I believe this country, with regard to its commercial position, although there is a great deal of depression, and certainly a great want of profitable prices, is not so bad as nearly every other country in the world.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, he would remind the noble Earl that during the progress of the French Treaty there were free and constant communications, owing to pressure in the House of Commons, with the large commercial bodies of this country on the subject. None of those communications were of a private nature, and as he took a constant part in these matters in the House of Commons, he was enabled to say that that publicity prevented a very great disaster to the country, in not permitting a Treaty to be concluded on less favourable terms than the old Treaty.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the noble Earl was quite in error in thinking that the Foreign Office had not been in communication with the commercial communities as to the two Treaties to which he had referred.

CANAL BOATS ACT (1877) AMENDMENT BILL.

  PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he wished to direct their Lordships' attention for a moment to a personal matter. In the course of the debate on the Canal Boats Bill, his noble Friend who had charge of the measure (Lord Carrington) stated that the powers which were given by the Bill for the inspection of canal boats were not more stringent than those which existed for the inspection of houses. He (the Earl of Wemyss) had ventured to dispute that statement, and to say that no powers existed for inspecting houses, unless there was reason to believe that some nuisance existed. For saying so, he had been taken soundly to task by his noble Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty (the Earl of North-brook), who declared that he was wrong, and mentioned an instance which occurred on his own property in Hampshire, where some cottages which belonged to him had been inspected, and attention called to their condition by the Inspector. He (the Earl of Wemyss) had thought it right, in these circumstances, to ascertain the real state of the law, and he found it to be such as he had stated. The state of the law was, that a Sanitary Inspector had no more right under the law to inspect any cottage or house than he had to go into the house of his noble Friend (Lord

  261
  Carrington) in Whitehall. If it was suspected, however, that the house was a nuisance to the public, then the Inspector went before a magistrate, and, on oath, stated his belief that a nuisance existed, after which he obtained an order to inspect the house. But even then the inspection was limited to certain hours—from 9 o'clock in the morning to 6 o'clock at night.
  LORD CARRINGTONsaid, he did not mean to convey that the powers were exactly the same. He must point out, however, that a house was not like a boat. A boat was always on the move, from 6 o'clock in the morning until 6 o'clock at night, and that was the reason why he had asked their Lordships to agree to the provision that the hours of inspection should be extended at least three hours longer.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter past Four o'clock.