QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 20 July 1885)

§ LORD MOUNT-TEMPLE,

in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether they would take into consideration the propriety of appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the expediency of further legislation for the protection of young girls? said, the interest their Lordships had taken in the Criminal Law Amendment Bill during three successive Sessions, and the ample discussion that bad been given to its details, justified him in calling attention to the present and the future aspect of this question. The Bill passed by their Lordships could give only an inadequate protection to girls from the deceits, devices, and violence to which they wore exposed; but it went as far as the facts obtained by the Committee in 1881–2 1162 seemed in public opinion to justify. The Committee reported the most important evidence they could find at that time. It was startling and painful, and gave a shook to the complacency and false estimates prevailing generally in the mind of the public. It aroused a number of earnest men and women to a fuller investigation of the horrible facts which were partially indicated by that evidence; many associations and committees went to work in good earnest, and at last the discovery of cruel fraud, violence, and imprisonment in private houses, unknown and hitherto unbelievable by ordinary people, had stimulated a desire for more adequate remedies to remove the shame of the imperfection of our law. The success of the first inquiry in suggesting legislation fitted to meet the criminal acts proved to exist pointed to the appointment of a further inquiry and the further raising of the dark veil which had hidden these abominable cruelties from the knowledge of the makers of the law. This inquiry ought to be directed by the Government, and not left to the direction and irresponsible impulses of private persons. If the Government declined to satisfy the demands of the public of all classes for a complete investigation of the nature and extent of these criminal practices, if it should ignore its responsibility, then probably the responsibility ignored by the Government would be taken up by individuals as a conscientious duty of mercy and protection towards tens or hundreds of thousands of weak and helpless girls. The most prominent of the facts was the organized trade in human flesh. It was increasing and acquiring more influence than any other trade except that of beer and spirits. It might be said—"Do not interfere with free trade;" but this was a trade in stolon goods, and was worse than the Slave Trade. The girls were kidnapped and imprisoned by force, and were more injured than any negro slaves. The object of the Commission would be not to interfere with vice between willing and responsible parties, but with that vice which became crime by the employment of fraud and force. The public was looking to the Government to deal effectually with this dreadful subject. It grieved those who had hearts to feel for the oppressed and consciences to protest against the weakness 1163 of the law which allowed such tyranny as now existed to go on unchecked. The public looked to their Lordships as the hereditary Representatives of the chivalry of England. St. George had become the Patron Saint of England because he conquered in his fight for the liberty and purity of woman, and rescued her from the devouring appetite of the dragon of lust. Their Lordships would not be defeated in their endeavours for the legal protection of suffering and injured young women.

§ THE PAYMASTER GENERAL (Earl BEAUCHAMP)

said that, while he sympathized with the object of the noble Lord, he must confess he did not quite understand the motives of the noble Lord in asking for such an inquiry. The noble Lord must be aware that the Criminal Law Amendment Bill, which had throe times passed their Lordships' House, was now before the House of Commons. If the noble Lord meant by his inquiry that the Bill now before the House of Commons should be withdrawn, he had to state that such was not the intention of Her Majesty's Government. The Secretary of State for the Home Department had already expressed the hope in the House of Commons that the Bill would be passed into law with certain modifications; and he thought it was hardly in accordance with the practice of Parliament or with the courtesy due to the other House that Her Majesty's Government should be asked to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into a subject dealt with in a measure sent down to the House of Commons. A great deal of evidence had recently-been brought before the public, and how far that was trustworthy he was not prepared to say; buthewould point out that a Royal Commission had no power whatever to examine witnesses upon oath, and he thought it would generally be agreed that any further inquiry into this subject should be in a form under which the evidence given should be under the sanction and authority of an oath. He did not think that any useful purpose would be served by further inquiry at the present moment not on oath. He could assure the noble Lord that Her Majesty's Government was keenly alive to the evils to which he referred; but the view he took upon this matter was that, even supposing it would be 1164 right and proper to interfere with the measure now before the House of Commons, no useful purpose would be served by taking further evidence on this subject except under the responsibility of an oath. With regard to the law of this matter, he would remind their Lordships that the House of Lords had not shown themselves insensible of their duties on the question. They had three times sent a Bill upon this subject to the other House, and each time the responsibility for the rejection of that measure had rested upon the shoulders of the House of Commons, and not upon their Lordships' House.