LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked the Lord Chancellor if it is the fact that the General Post Office has no power to prevent the transmission through the post of foreign lottery advertisements; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will obtain the power by legislation? He said many of their Lordships would no doubt have noticed the great number of letters coming from Germany with advertisements of lotteries—in short, what might be called "gambling at home." In 1891, the late Sir George Campbell put a question in another place as to whether this was not illegal, and the Home Secretary, Sir Henry Matthews, informed him that he was advised the Post Office had no power to stop them. Printed matter that was illegal under Lord Campbell's Act could be intercepted by the Post Office, which would have power to prosecute the senders under an Act of 1870. He would 655 ask the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack whether lottery advertisements when sent open through the Post Office could not be detained, for at the date the Home Secretary gave the answer he had referred to these advertisements were sent in closed envelopes.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR(Lord HERSCHELL)My Lords, certain Acts were passed many years ago dealing with the publication of proposals relating to foreign lotteries, and the printing and publication of advertisements of such lotteries. They were not passed with any idea of putting down lotteries, but I believe with the object, at all events as regards the earlier Acts, of protecting British lotteries against the competition of foreign lotteries. At that time it was not an uncommon thing to raise money in this country by means of lotteries; but although the Acts were passed with the object I have stated, they are still on the Statute Book, and it is still illegal to print or publish an advertisement of any such lottery. That being the case, it may be that, under the Post Office Act, 1875, it would be competent for the Treasury by warrant to direct that these foreign lottery advertisements, when they are sent open through the Post Office, should be detained and not forwarded to their destinations in this country, as indecent or improper advertisements are detained. Although it might be perfectly competent to give a direction of that sort, it is obvious that if there was nothing on the envelopes or covers to indicate what the enclosures were, it would be necessary to institute some amount of search on the part of the Post Office to find out that those advertisements were within them; and if such directions were given it is manifest that the senders might take the precaution of not putting anything outside that would indicate what the contents were. That raises the consideration whether it is worth while to stop the sending of advertisements in that way, and to undertake the trouble and inconvenience it would involve. Possibly, if it would stop the sending of these advertisements altogether, it might be worth while to make the effort, but this would only relate to advertisements sent in open covers. If the advertisements were sent as closed letters an entirely fresh difficulty would arise. I do not think it 656 would be possible to give directions for the opening of letters, and therefore by sending closed letters the effect of a warrant could be got rid of. It seems, therefore, very doubtful whether any advantage could be gained by issuing such a warrant at present. However, I will consider whether any practical step can be taken to stop the sending of these advertisements altogether.