HL Deb 23 May 1884 vol 288 cc1156-67

Amendments reported (according to order).

Clause 3 (Procuring defilement of woman by fraud).

On the Motion of The Earl of DALHOUSIE, the following Amendments made:—In page 2, line 3, after ("unlawful") insert ("carnal"); line 13, after ("unlawful") insert ("carnal"), and after ("connection") insert ("either within or without the Queen's dominions with any man"); and in line 20, after ("labour") insert as a separate paragraph:— Every misdemeanour under sub-section four of this section shall, in England and Ireland, be deemed to be an offence within and subject to the provisions of the Act of the session of the twenty-second and twenty-third years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chapter seventeen, intituled 'An Act to prevent vexatious indictments for certain misdemeanours.'

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5 (Defilement of girl between twelve and sixteen years of age).

THE EARL OF MILLTOWN

proposed to amend the clause by substituting 14 for 16 as the age at which consent could be given. Formerly, the age was 12; but a Bill was brought into the other House in 1873 by Mr. Charley to raise it to 14. That change, however, was violently resisted; it was objected to by Members of Mr. Gladstone's Government, and it was opposed by Sir John Coleridge, who said that the law of all European nations fixed the age of a woman at 12, and that of a man at 14; and he could not consent to create a criminal offence in the case of consent by a girl over 12. The noble Viscount (Viscount Cranbrook), then Mr. Gathorne Hardy, also expressed himself in favour of the age of 12 as that at which there should be no power of consent, though he admitted that there might be cases of hardship in which it would be desirable to have a higher age. That Bill came to nothing; but in 1875 Mr. Charley brought in another Bill with the same object, when, by a compromise, and partly at the suggestion of the Recorder, Mr. Russell Gurney, the age of 13 was inserted; and in their Lordships' House Lord Lyttelton proposed 14; but the compromise of 13 was adhered to. Now it was proposed to jump to 16; but it was clear that the Government were not fully satisfied of the reasonableness of the proposal, because they had hedged it with two safeguards— one that the Act should not apply where the offender was shown not to have known the age of the girl, and the other requiring the consent of the Public Prosecutor before proceedings could be taken. Their Lordships would be surprised at the number of marriages which took place at 15 and 16, although in many cases the age was not ascertained, as the word "minor" was simply inserted in the certificate. But, according to the registers, there were, in 1878, 21 girls married at 15, and 291 at 16; in 1879, the numbers were, respectively, 32 and 253; in 1880, 28 and 272; in 1881, 20 and 288; and, in 1822, 29 and 299, and in each year one girl was actually married at 14. And yet it was now proposed to make it a misdemeanour to have connection with those mobile girls with their own consent, and even on their own solicitation. He would like to know whether the Government had consulted the Common Law Judges? Every Judge to whom he (the Earl of Milltown) had spoken on the subject had expressed himself as very dissatisfied with the Bill. Their Lordships' House had won a reputation for a sobriety of judgment which frequently corrected the impetuous and premature decision of the other House; and he trusted they would not in that Bill do anything to impair that reputation, and cause more to look to the Lower House to correct the ill-advised and rash legislation of the Upper.

Amendment moved, in page 2, line 43, to leave out ("sixteen" and insert ("fourteen.")—(The Earl of Milltown.)

LORD MOUNT TEMPLE

said, that more knowledge of the sad circumstances that this Bill dealt with was now known; and if the learned persons to whom the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Milltown) had referred had had before them the evidence which was given before the Committee they would have formed different opinions. Evidence of various kinds had been given before the Committee, and it was not without grave consideration that the age had been fixed at 16. It was shown that offences were committed on girls at lower and lower ages, and they required more protection against the snares and traps laid for them by a large class of degraded men and their female accomplices. The protection of the Bill against the accusation of having given consent to a seducer was fixed at the ago when girlhood passed into womanhood; but a girl under 14 was a child, and ought not to to be made responsible for the act that degraded and ruined her.

LORD ELLENBOROUGH

said, that noble Lords did not perceive how illogical and inconsistent it was to raise the age and increase the penalties in reference to an older girl, at the same time refusing corporal punishment in the case of brutal violence to a child of tender years, while the Legislature allowed the infliction of corporal punishment for violence towards officials of a gaol; therefore, in his opinion, the Bill was comparatively useless, because it failed to award a sufficiently stringent punishment for the crime most needed to be dealt with under the Bill—namely, the violation of an innocent child under 12 years of age.

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE

said, he would call their Lordships' attention to the fact that the age of 16 was in the Bill when it passed last year; and for that reason he could not ask the House now to accept the Amendment.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, he was unable to support his noble Friend's (the Earl of Milltown's) Amendment. When one age was put against another, it was difficult to bring forward the particular reasons which had induced the Select Committee to come to a decision. The Committee considered the matter with extreme anxiety, and resolved that the limit of 16 years should be adopted. He could not be a party to departing from that limit. It was itself rather in the nature of a compromise among the Members of the Committee. On the whole, he did not believe there would be any danger in accepting this age; and he doubted the power of that House, sitting as a Whole House, to determine such a matter as this in a satisfactory manner. If they wanted to re-open the decision of the Committee, they ought to appoint another Committee.

LORD BRAMWELL

, in supporting the Amendment, said, he did so because he thought it would be difficult to get a jury to convict at the age stated in the Bill, when they could find no more fault with the man than they could with the woman or girl.

THE EARL OF MILLTOWN

protested against subjecting young men who might be led away by immoral girls under 16 to the penalties of the Criminal Law.

On Question, "That the word ('sixteen') stand part of the Clause?"

Their Lordships divided: — Contents 102; Not-Contents 29: Majority 73.

CONTENTS.
Canterbury, L. Archp. Redesdale, E.
Rosse, E.
Selborne, E. (L. Chancellor.) Shaftesbury, E.
Stanhope, E.
Sydney, E.
Bedford, D.
Devonshire, D. Canterbury, V.
Somerset, D. Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)
Bristol, M. Eversley, V.
Hertford, M. Exmouth, V.
Northampton, M. Hardinge, V.
Salisbury, M. Hawarden, V.
Powerscourt, V.
Belmore, E. Sherbrooke, V.
Camperdown, E.
Carnarvon, E, Bangor, L. Bp.
Cowper, E. Bath and Wells, L. Bp.
Derby, E. Carlisle, L. Bp.
Ducie, E. Durham, L. Bp.
Fortescue, E. Exeter, L. Bp.
Granville, E. Gloucester and Bristol, L. BP.
Lathom, E.
Leven and Melville, E. Hereford, L. Bp.
Lovelace, E. Lichfield, L. Bp.
Lucan, E. Liverpool, L. Bp.
Morley, E. [Teller.] London, L. Bp.
Northbrook, E. Rochester, L. Bp.
Powis, E. St. Albans, L. Bp.
Ravensworth, E. St. Asaph, L. Bp.
St. David's, L. Bp. Hatherton, L.
Winchester, L. Bp. Hawke, L.
Howth, L. (E. Howth.)
Ashford, L. (V. Bury.) Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)
Bagot, L.
Barrogill, L. (E. Caithness.) Lamington, L.
Lawrence, L.
Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery) [Teller.] Lovat, L.
Meldrum, L. (M. Huntly.)
Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)
Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)
Camoys, L.
Carew, L. Mount-Temple, L.
Carlingford, L, Penrhyn, L.
Carrington, L. Poltimore, L.
Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.) Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)
Churchill, L. Reay, L.
Clanwilliam, L. (E. Clanwilliam.) Ribblesdale, L.
Ross, L. (E. Glasgow.)
Clifford of Chudleigh, L. Sandhurst, L.
Stafford, L. (V. Enfield.)
Colchester, L.
Cottesloe, L. Stratheden and Campbell, L.
Crewe, L.
Denman, L. Sudeley, L.
Digby, L. Talbot de Malahide, L.
Dinevor, L. Thurlow, L.
Egerton, L. Waveney, L.
Gage, L. (V. Gage.) Winmarleigh, L.
Hammond, L. Zouche of Haryngworth, L.
Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)
Harlech, L.
NOT-CONTENTS.
Rutland, D. Houghton, L.
Sutherland, D. Inchiquin, L.
Kintore, L.(E. Kintore.)
Ashburnham, E. Leconfield, L. [Teller.]
Cadogan, E.
Coventry, E. North, L.
Milltown, E. [Teller.] Oranmore and Browne, L.
Strange, E. (D. Athole.)
Saltoun, L.
Brabourne, L. Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)
Bramwell, L.
Cloncurry, L. Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)
Dorchester, L.
Ellenborough, L. Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)
FitzGerald, L.
Forbes, L. Teynham, L.
Hartismere, L. (L. Henniker.) Ventry, L.
Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)
Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun.)

Amendment disagreed to.

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE

moved to amend the clause by inserting after the word "labour," in line20, words bringing every misdemeanour under Sub-section 4 within the Vexatious Indictments Act.

Amendment moved, in page 3, leave out lines 15 to 20, inclusive, and insert— ("Every misdemeanour under this section shall, in England and Ireland, be deemed to be an offence within and subject to the provisions of the Act of the session of the twenty-second and twenty-third years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chapter seventeen, intituled 'An Act to prevent vexatious indictments for certain misdemeanours.' ") —(The Earl of Dalhousie.)

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, he was afraid that the Amendment would not prevent chantage, or the extortion of hush money.

LORD ABERDARE

said, he would remind the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) that the clause was intended for the protection of very young girls.

Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 10 (Amendment of 2 & 3 Vict, c. 47, s. 54, and 10 & 11 Vict. c. 89, s. 28, as to prostitutes).

THE EARL OF MILLTOWN

moved to omit the clause, which provided for the arrest by the police of persons soliciting without any complaint of annoyance from the passengers, on the ground that it placed a most injudicious power in the hands of the police. How could they tell that soliciting had taken place unless complaint was made to them; and how could it be guaranteed that they would not arrest respectable women to whom loose men had made insulting overtures? Moreover, there were among the police black sheep who would abuse this power and levy black mail to any extent. It would, moreover, create a bad feeling between the police and the public, such as now existed in Paris, where the police possessed this arbitrary power. Young men would not stand by and see women dragged off to prison who had committed no apparent offence, and street rioting would be the result. The present law went quite as far as it was safe to go; and if the public did not take the trouble to make a complaint, they had only themselves to blame for any annoyance they suffered.

Moved, To leave out Clause 10.—(The Earl of Milltown.)

THE EARL OE DALHOUSIE

, in opposing the Motion, said, he maintained that the clause did not confer the dangerous powers mentioned by the noble Earl. He would point out to their Lordships that it could not apply to respectable women, as it distinctly specified "common prostitutes or night - walkers." Moreover, it was based on the recommendations of the Committee, and he must ask the House to agree to it.

On Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill?"

Their Lordships divided:—Contents 59; Not-Contents 56: Majority 3.

CONTENTS.
Canterbury, L. Archp. St. David's, L. Bp.
Winchester, L. Bp.
Selborne, E. (L. Chancellor.)
Aberdare, L.
Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]
Devonshire, D.
Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)
Bristol, M.
Northampton, M. Carlingford, L.
Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)
Belmore, E.
Camperdown, E. Churchill, L.
Cowper, E. Clifford of Chudleigh, L.
Derby, E.
Ducie, E. Crewe, L.
Kimberley, E. Denman, L.
Leven and Melville, E. Granard, L. (E. Granard.)
Morley, E.
Northbrook, E. Hammond, L.
Redesdale, E. Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)
Sydney, E. Hawke, L.
Howth, L. (E. Howth.)
Sherbrooke, V. Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)
Sidmouth, V.
Lovat, L.
Bangor, L. Bp. Mount-Temple, L.
Bath and Wells, L. Bp. Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)
Carlisle, L. Bp.
Durham, L. Bp. Reay, L.
Exeter, L. Bp. Ribblesdale, L.
Gloucester and Bristol, L. BP. Ross, L. (E. Glasgow.)
Sandhurst, L.
Hereford, L. Bp. Strafford, L. (V. Enfield.)
Lichfield. L. Bp.
Liverpool, L. Bp. Sudeley, L.
London, L. Bp. Thurlow, L. [Teller.]
Rochester, L. Bp. Waveney, L.
St. Asaph, L. Bp. Winmarleigh, L.
NOT-CONTENTS.
Somerset, D. Canterbury, V.
Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)
Hertford, M.
Salisbury, M. Hardinge, V.
Hawarden, V.
Powerscourt, V.
Ashburnham, E.
Cadogan, E. Bagot, L.
Carnarvon, E. Brabourne, L.
Coventry, E. Bramwell, L.
Fortescue, E. Clanwilliam, L. (E. Clanwilliam.)
Lathom, E.
Lovelace, E. Cloncurry, L.
Lucan, E. Colchester, L.
Milltown, E. [Teller.] de Ros, L.
Powis, E. Digby, L.
Ravensworth, E. Dinevor, L.
Rosse, E. Dorchester, L.
Shaftesbury, E. Ellenborough, L.
Stanhope, E. FitzGerald, L,
Forbes, L. Oranmore and Browne, L.
Harlech, L.
Hartismere, L. (L. Henniker.) Penrhyn, L.
Poltimore, L.
Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun.) Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)
Houghton, L. Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)
Inchiquin, L.
Kintore, L, (E. Kintore.) Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)
Lamington, L. Talbot de Malahide, L.
Lawrence, L. Teynham, L.
Leconfield, L. [Teller.] Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)
Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)
Zouche of Haryngworth, L.
North, L.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 12 (Summary proceedings against brothel keeper, &c.)

THE EARL OF MILLTOWN

, in moving the omission of the clause, which gave power to the police to enter without warrant or complaint a house of ill fame and to prosecute the keeper of such house, said, the question was fully debated last year, and their Lordships would stultify themselves if they now passed what they then strongly objected to. There was no evidence whatever that the present law was insufficient. When those houses constituted a nuisance they could be, and in fact were, successfully prosecuted and put an end to.

Moved, To leave out Clause 12.—(The Earl of Milltown.)

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE

, in opposing the Motion, said, the retention of the clause in the Bill was necessary on the ground that the present law was inoperative on account of the unwillingness of people generally to enforce it. The clause did nothing more than give a power of summary procedure, with some enlargement of definition.

THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)

said, he believed Borne power was required beyond that of the present law, for there was hardly a local Bill came before him, by which the local authorities did not seek to obtain larger powers of the kind conferred by this clause. He always said it was a matter to be dealt with by the general law, and not by the local law.

LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE

said, that the local authorities referred to by the noble Earl sought regulation rather than suppression. An officer of the Army Lad remarked to him that the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Act had resulted in about half the Army being in hospital; and under this Bill, if the clause were allowed to pass, the other half would soon be in prison.

On Question, "That Clause 12 stand part of the Bill?"

Their Lordships divided: — Contents 72: Not-Contents 37: Majority 35.

CONTENTS.
Canterbury, L, Archp. Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)
Selborne, E. (L. Chancellor.) Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)
Carlingford, L.
Devonshire, D. Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)
Bristol, M. Clanwilliam, L. (E. Clanwilliam.)
Belmore, E. Clifford of Chudleigh, L.
Camperdown, E.
Derby, E. Cottesloe, L.
Ducie, E. Crewe, L.
Granville, E. Denman, L.
Kimberley, E. Egerton, L.
Leven and Melville, E. Ellenborough, L.
Morley, E. FitzGerald, L.
Northbrook, E. Forbes, L.
Redesdale, E. Granard, L. (E. Granard.)
Shaftesbury, E.
Sydney, E. Hammond, L.
Howth, L. (E. Howth.)
Canterbury, V. Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)
Eversley, V.
Sherbrooke, V. Lawrence, L.
Lovat, L.
Bangor, L, Bp. Mount-Temple, L.
Bath and Wells, L. Bp. Penrhyn, L.
Carlisle, L. Bp. Poltimore, L.
Durham, L. Bp. Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)
Exeter, L. Bp.
Gloucester and Bristol, L. Bp. Reay, L.
Ribblesdale, L.
Hereford, L. Bp. Ross, L. (E. Glasgow.)
Lichfield, L. Bp. Sandhurst, L.
Liverpool, L. Bp. Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)
London, L. Bp.
Rochester, L. Bp. Stratford, L. (V. Enfield.)
St. Asaph, L. Bp.
St. David's, L. Bp. Stratheden and Campbell, L.
Winchester, L. Bp.
Sudeley, L.
Aberdare, L. Thurlow, L. [Teller.]
Bagot, L. Ventry, L.
Boyle. L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.] Waveney, L.
Winmarleigh, L.
Bramwell, L.
NOT-CONTENTS.
Hertford, M. Lucan, E.
Salisbury, M. Milltown, E. [Teller.]
Powis, E.
Ashburnham, E. Ravensworth, E.
Carnarvon, E. Stanhope, E.
Fortescue, E.
Lathom, E. Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)
Lovelace, E.
Hardinge, V. Lamington, L.
Hawarden, V. Leconfield, L.
Powerscourt, V. Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)
Sidmouth, V.
North, L.
Brabourne, L. Oranmore and Browne, L.
Cloncurry, L.
Colchester, L. Shute, L. (V. Barrington.) [Teller.]
Digby, L.
Dinevor, L. Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)
Hartismere, L. (L. Henniker.)
Talbot de Malahide, L.
Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun.) Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)
Houghton, L. Zouche of Haryngworth, L.
Inchiquin, L.
Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

Clause agreed to.

Clause 13 (Future tenancies determinable for keeping brothels).

Amendments made, in page 7, line 4, by leaving out ("and his") and inserting ("his executors, administrators, and"; and in lines 7 and 8, by leaving out ("and all persons claiming any estate or interest through or under him") and inserting ("his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns.")

LORD BRAMWELL

moved the insertion of an Amendment directed against making a lessee of a valuable property lose his lease simply because some subsequent assignee or tenant had used the house for disorderly purposes.

Amendment moved, in page 7, line 12, leave out after ("building") to ("require") in line 15, and insert— Provided, that where any other house or premises is or are included in the same lease, agreement for a lease, or other contract of tenancy, with the house or building so used as aforesaid, and any person other than the person or persons so using such house or building is interested therein as lessee, tenant, or occupier, the landlord shall not have power by virtue of this Act to determine or put an end to the said lease, agreement, or contract of tenancy, so far as relates to such other house, or premises, or the estate, term, or interest of any person so interested therein as aforesaid, but the same shall remain in full force as if the house or building so used as a brothel as aforesaid had not been included in the said lease, agreement for a lease, or contract of tenancy; and in the event of the house or building so used as aforesaid being subject to an undivided rent in common with such other house or premises, the rents shall be apportioned as in case of eviction of part of the premises let, and all covenants and conditions contained in such lease, agreement for a lease, or contract of tenancy shall remain and be applicable to such other house or premises as aforesaid."—(The Lord Bramwell.)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

said, there was no greater hardship involved in the clause than was involved already in many leases where particular trades or occupations were forbidden under pain of forfeiture.

LORD BRAMWELL

said, that in the cases referred to by the noble and learned Earl equitable relief was afforded. He did not know whether it was so in this case; but if not the offender ought to be made liable in damages to the original lessee. The clause itself was bad in principle, as if a sub-lessee committed an offence under it not only his lease, but all other leases prior to his, would be forfeited.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, the clause was a very beneficial one for the ground landlord. But it was a strong thing that the landlord who had had a house built for him, and done nothing to deserve such good fortune, should be able to take possession of the house of his lessee because some person over whom the lessee had no control had let, it might be one room, for immoral purposes.

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE

said, he was willing to accept the Amendment.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

repeated that this was nothing more than the restrictive covenants to be found in most leases, and he did not see that any injustice would be done.

LORD BRAMWELL

pointed out that in the cases referred to by the noble and learned Earl upon the Woolsack, the lessee had the covenant clearly expressed before him, so that he knew his liabilities, and also that it was by agreement between him and the lessor; while by the clause proposed they were compelled to have the conditions in the lease.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, he would suggest that the Amendment should be inserted, and then, after the third reading, the Government would consider whether any further modifications could be made. Of course, the noble and learned Lord (Lord Bramwell) and the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) could, if they pleased, move the rejection of the clause on the third reading.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made, in page 7, line 32, by inserting after ("occu- Pier") ("not being the owner); "and in line 21, leaving out all after ("shall") and inserting— ("Operate in law as an absolute forfeiture and determination, so far as respects such premises, of any lease, agreement for a lease, or other contract of tenancy whereby such premises are held by him without any other action, suit, or proceeding at law for that purpose.")

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 107.)