§ [NOTE.—The page and line refer to Bill (169) as first printed for the House of Lords.
§ The Commons Reason and Amendment are printed in italics.]
§ Lords Amendment.
§ Clause 6, page 3, line 31, leave out from ("months") to the end of subsection (2).
§ The Commons disagree to this Amendment because they consider that flogging, except after the verdict of a jury, is undesirable.
202§ Lords Amendment.
§
Clause 6, page 3, line 40, after subsection (3) insert the following new subsection:
(4) Every person, of either sex, who acts as a pimp, souteneur, or bully, or otherwise for the purposes of gain aids or abets prostitution, shall be guilty of an offence under the Vagrancy Act, 1898, or in Scotland under the Immoral Traffic (Scotland) Act, 1902, and those Acts as amended and extended by this section shall apply accordingly.
§ The Commons disagree to this Amendment, but propose the following new subsection in lieu thereof.
§
Clause 6, page 3, line 40, after subsection (3) insert the following new subsection:
Every female who is proved to have for the purposes of gain exercised control, direction, or influence over the movements of a prostitute, in such a manner as to show that she is aiding, abetting, or compelling her prostitution with any person, or generally, shall be guilty of an offence under The Vagrancy Act, 1898, or in Scotland under The Immoral Traffic (Scotland) Act, 1902, and those Acts as amended and extended by this section shall apply accordingly.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT HALDANE)My Lords, the first of the Amendments relates to words which were inserted on the Motion of my noble and learned friend the Lord Chief Justice. The purpose of his words was to keep alive the jurisdiction to administer corporal punishment which Quarter Sessions at present possess. Some question has been raised as to its existence, and there had been a decision in the Court of Criminal Appeal which supported the view that this jurisdiction existed. The Bill itself enacts corporal punishment for a certain class of offences, and therefore it is no longer quite as necessary that we should retain the old jurisdiction as it was before there was a prospect of this Bill becoming law. As your Lordships doubtless concur with me in thinking that we ought to make sure of this Bill as it stands, I move that we do not insist on the first Amendment to which the Commons have disagreed.
§ Moved, That the House do not insist on the Amendment to which the Commons have disagreed.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORAs regards the second Amendment, in connection with which the Commons propose a new subsection instead of the subsection which was inserted in this House, the subsection as redrafted by the Commons is, I think, a little more guarded, but in substance it is the same as the subsection which your Lordships inserted. I therefore propose 203 to move, as regards this Amendment, that your Lordships do not insist on your subsection but agree with the Commons in the subsection which they propose in lieu thereof.
§ Moved, That the House do not insist upon the Amendment to which the Commons have disagreed.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons Amendment substituting a new subsection.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORYour Lordships having agreed to the Motions which I have submitted, I hope it will be possible for the Royal Assent to this Bill to be signified to-morrow morning.