PRISONERS (TEMPORARY DISCHARGE FOR ILL-HEALTH) BILL. (Hansard, 24 April 1913)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT HALDANE)
My Lords, I rise to move the Second Reading of this Bill, and I confess that I do so with a sense of regret that it should be necessary, for although the Bill is of general application it is notorious that it is directed to a certain class of women prisoners who, having engaged in acts of violence and been properly sentenced for the offences they committed, moved by a feeling that they were fighting for what they considered their liberties, have refused to submit to their punishment. A great writer has remarked of liberty that it may be the most terrible of all notions, and when it enters into the mind of any one it may produce complete confusion there. It has been so in this case, and these women have refused to accept the punish- 320 ment which has been awarded to them by the laws of the State to which they belong.
We have a picture of what ought to be the right feeling in such a case. When Socrates was unjustly sentenced, in his own opinion, for an offence he had committed against the citizens of Athens, and when Crito came to him and offered him means of escape, Socrates would not fly from his punishment; for, he said, "I am a son of Athens, and even when Athens has used me unjustly I will obey her decrees." There has been a want of that spirit in this case, and the State has been driven to do what the State must do if its very foundations are not to be undermined. We cannot tolerate anarchy in any shape or form. Those who have to administer the law must administer it, and if they find that the powers placed by the Legislature in their hands are not sufficient they must seek to supplement them. That is the case here. The difficulty with which those who are administering the law have to deal in this case is that they are placed in a dilemma. These women in 1909 began a movement on an extensive scale for refusing to endure their sentences. They preferred to starve themselves, to starve themselves if necessary to death, rather than submit to these sentences. The prison authorities and the Home Secretary are placed in this dilemma—either they must release them and thereby the sentences are not served and justice is defeated, or they must forcibly feed them, or if, from considerations of health, it is not possible to forcibly feed them they must be released.
Then comes this difficulty, that release means release altogether, there being no power to release for a period on terms that the prisoner must come back when the period of temporary release is over. Under the Penal Servitude Acts, if a licence to go out from a penitentiary is granted the prisoner's time of absence counts as part of his sentence, so that when the prisoner comes back the sentence has been shortened by the time during which the prisoner was out of prison. That does not matter very much in the case of long sentences, but it does matter in cases of imprisonment for a fortnight or a month or six weeks. By a series of starvation processes a prisoner might compel the authorities to release her so that the period for which she actually served her sentence would be very small 321 if the law were assimilated to that which prevails in the case of penal servitude. Therefore it is necessary to take a different course. Under this Bill the object is to secure as far as possible that the prisoner should serve her sentence.
The cardinal principle of the Bill is that when a prisoner is sentenced to imprison-merit the authorities may release her on the condition that she is to return on a certain date—they may extend the date if considerations of health render it necessary—but when she returns she will have to go on serving her sentence and make up the time during which she had been out. In other words, she will always serve the whole of the term of imprisonment should this Bill become law, notwithstanding the fact that she has been temporarily released. That is really the essence of the Bill. When the Bill was before the other House the point was raised that it was desirable to put the conditions in the Bill itself. The Home Secretary pointed out that that would be disadvantageous to the prisoner. He told the House of the terms of the licence, which are simply these. The prisoner will be at liberty to go out till a certain date; on that date she is to return. And there are these two conditions, that meantime she must notify any change of address and must undertake not to violate the law. If she fails to observe these conditions she will have to come back at once. The Home Secretary undertook that that should be the form of the licence, and that he would give Parliament due notice if at any time it was altered.
The first clause of the Bill sets out what I have spoken of as the cardinal principle—the point that when a prisoner under sentence is temporarily discharged, in pursuance of an Order of this description, the currency of the sentence is to be broken and the prisoner will have to come back and serve the whole of the sentence. These powers apply also in the case of penal servitude, but the powers under the Penal Servitude Act are left undisturbed so that they can be used alternatively. The Bill will deal effectively with the matter. It will be no advantage to the prisoner to go out if she knows that she has to come back and complete her sentence; nor will there be the necessity of forcibly feeding her if considerations of health are against it. But the power of forcible feeding remains, the whole matter being in the discretion of the Home Secretary.
322 I think there has been a certain amount of exaggeration about the number of women who have been starving themselves in prison. Last year there were 240 imprisoned. Of these, fifty-seven were forcibly fed. There were twenty-six in addition whom it was necessary to release because some form of disease satisfied the authorities that there was substantial risk in continuing the process of forcible feeding. This year we have not had the same length of time in which to judge, but there have been this year seventy persons imprisoned of whom ten have been forcibly fed and five have had to be discharged. The result is that the great bulk of these prisoners are undergoing their sentences. At the present moment there are some half dozen in prison who, if this Bill does not receive the Royal Assent to-morrow, will have the advantage of having defeated the law and be able to walk out of prison, because there is no possibility of keeping them any longer without forcibly feeding them and thereby seriously endangering their lives. Therefore if your Lordships approve of the Second Reading of this Bill I shall venture to ask that Standing Order No. XXXIX be suspended, and that in consideration of the urgency of the case the further stages of the Bill should be taken at this sitting. I beg to move.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
My Lords, the noble and learned Viscount has asked us to take a very remarkable course in respect of this Bill—namely, to put it through all its stages at the present sitting. I confess that it is with considerable reluctance that those of us who sit on this side of the House assent to such a course. We do not believe that this is the proper way in which to pass legislation, least of all to pass legislation which is in restraint of the liberty of His Majesty's subjects. But at the same time we recognise the difficulty in which the Government are placed, and I suppose we are bound in the present instance to abate somewhat our rights in this matter. I do not think that those of us who sit here, taken as a whole, are prepared to accept responsibility for this Bill. It is an emergency Bill; its provisions are very remarkable; and we have not the opportunity of judging, as the Government have, of the reasons which make them think that this Bill will be effective, but if it is effective no one will 323 congratulate the Government more than those who sit here. Undoubtedly this condition of anarchy must be put an end to, and whatever powers are necessary to put an end to it I am quite sure your Lordships will cheerfully grant to the Government.
But I am not perfectly certain that this Bill will be effective. One observation which the Lord Chancellor dropped filled me with alarm. He said that one of the conditions of the licence was to be that these women were to undertake not to violate the law. If that is so, I am afraid the Bill be will wholly ineffective, because I expect that none of them will undertake not to break the law. If the noble and learned Viscount meant that if they did break the law then the licence would be withdrawn, that is quite another matter.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
That is what I meant.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I am glad to have elicited that from the noble and learned Viscount, because these women, who are really insane, would rejoice in refusing to undertake not to break the law, and we should be in the same position as before. I am glad that that is not so. The Government have put forward this Bill as their remedy. We certainly have no remedy to propose in its place, and we therefore accept the proposal which has been made; and as the noble and learned Viscount tells us that the Bill is urgent and must receive the Royal Assent tomorrow we shall not—I know I am speaking the sentiments of my noble friend who leads the Opposition and who has been obliged to leave his place for the moment—we shall not put any obstacle in the way of the taking of the procedure proposed in this exceptional case.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR
I thank your Lordships for agreeing to the course proposed in this difficult and disagreeable position. It is an emergency Bill, and we are doing the best we can. The words in the conditions of the licence are that the prisoner shall abstain from any violation of the law. She is not asked to undertake not to break the law, but if she does break the law she has to come back.