Chapter XXII: Section 10: , of the Morality Bill, is worth transcribing in full

“(1) If any male person shall have connection with a woman who is to his knowledge his granddaughter, sister, daughter, niece, or mother, he shall be guilty of felony, and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding two years, or be kept in penal servitude for any term not less than three years and not exceeding seven years: Provided that if it is alleged in the indictment and proved that the girl was, at the time of the commission of the offence, under the age of sixteen years, the maximum term of penal servitude which the court may inflict shall be ten years.

“(2) If any male person shall attempt to have connection with a woman who is to his knowledge his granddaughter, sister, niece, or mother, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding two years.

“(3) If any woman, not being a girl, shall permit her grandfather, father, brother, uncle, or son to have connection with her (knowing him to be her grandfather, father, brother, uncle, or son, as the case may be) she shall be guilty of a felony, and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding two years, or to be kept in penal servitude for any term not less than three years, and not exceeding seven years.”

Where the word “mother” is used in the first part of subsection (1), at sight it appears careless to put, nearer the end of the same subsection, “provided that if it is alleged in the indictment and proved that _the girl was, at the time of the commission of the offence, under the age of sixteen years,” etc._

The “Memorandum” preceding the Morality Bill contains an epitome of the whole conception. “The general object of this Bill is to substitute for the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, the Vagrancy Act, 1898, the Punishment of Incest Act, 1908, the Obscene Publications Act, 1857, the Indecent Advertisements Act, 1889, and certain other enactments, a comprehensive measure which shall materially strengthen the law relating to offences against morality and decency.... The chief proposals of the Bill are:--

“1. To raise ‘the age of consent’ to nineteen, the full offence to be felony, and the maximum punishment to be--(_a_) if the girl is any age under sixteen, penal servitude for ten years; (_b_) if the girl is over sixteen, penal servitude for five years.

“2. To protect all feeble-minded women and girls, the full offence to be felony, the attempt a misdemeanour, and the maximum punishment to be for the felony penal servitude for five years, and for the misdemeanour imprisonment for two years.

“3. To make it felony to obtain, and a misdemeanour to attempt to obtain, consent by any inducement or threat in connection with employment, the maximum punishment to be for the felony penal servitude for five years, and for the misdemeanour imprisonment for two years.

“4. To make it a misdemeanour for any woman or girl of abandoned character to permit a boy under nineteen years of age to have immoral relations with her, or for any person to favour or encourage such relations, the maximum punishment to be imprisonment for two years.

“5. To make the full offences specified in section two, which relates to procuration, of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, felonies, for which the maximum punishment is to be penal servitude for five or ten years, according to the age of the girl; and to extend the protection against procuration, and attempted procuration, now enjoyed by girls of good character under the age of twenty-one--(_a_) to all women of good character; (_b_) to all feeble-minded women and girls, whatever their character; (_c_) to all girls under the age of nineteen, whatever their character.

“6. To make the offences specified in subsections (1) and (2) of section three of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 (_viz._, procuration by threats or false pretences, etc.), felonies for which the maximum punishment is to be penal servitude for five or ten years, according to the age of the girl; and to make an attempt to procure by false pretences a misdemeanour for which the maximum punishment is to be imprisonment for two years.

“7. To make the offence specified in subsection (3) of section three of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 (_viz._, the administration of drugs for an immoral purpose) felony for which the maximum punishment is to be penal servitude for ten years.

“8. To make the offences specified in sections six, seven and eight of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 (_viz._, the offences of permitting defilement on premises, of abduction for an immoral purpose, and the unlawful detention for such purpose) felonies for which the maximum punishment is to be penal servitude for five or ten years, according to the age of the girl.

“9. To make an offence under section eleven of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885--(_a_) when committed with a boy under the age of sixteen years, felony for which the maximum punishment is to be penal servitude for ten years; (_b_) when committed with a person over that age, felony punishable with penal servitude for five years.

“10. To make the keeping of premises for immoral purposes a misdemeanour punishable summarily with a fine of 50_l._ and imprisonment for six months, or upon conviction on indictment with a fine of 200_l._ and imprisonment for two years.

“11. To make further provision for the suppression of indecent, immoral, and grossly offensive literature, pictures, advertisements, etc., the offence to be a misdemeanour punishable upon summary conviction with a fine of 50_l._ and imprisonment for six months, or upon conviction on indictment with a fine of 100_l._ and imprisonment for twelve months. Further powers are given to the Postmaster-General.

“12. To make it a misdemeanour punishable upon summary conviction with imprisonment for six months, or upon conviction on indictment with imprisonment for twelve months, for any male person knowingly to live upon the immoral earnings of a woman or girl; and to make it a misdemeanour punishable upon summary conviction with imprisonment for six months for any woman to do so. (The expression ‘immoral earnings’ is defined to mean the earnings of prostitution or of habitual immorality.)

“13. To make it a misdemeanour punishable summarily with imprisonment for six months, or upon conviction on indictment with imprisonment for twelve months, for a male person to solicit persistently for an immoral purpose in a street or public place.

“14. To make ordinary cases of soliciting punishable summarily with a fine of 10_l._, or with imprisonment for two months without the option of a fine, or upon a second or subsequent conviction with a fine of 30_l._, or with imprisonment for six months without the option of a fine.

“15. To extend to an amended form the provisions of the Children’s Act, 1908, relating to persons having the custody of girls, and either causing their seduction or not exercising due care, to the cases of girls between the ages of sixteen and nineteen years.

“16. To strengthen the provisions of the Children’s Act, 1908, relating to the punishment of parents and others who allow children and young persons to reside in or frequent premises kept for immoral purposes; and to extend those provisions to the protection of persons between the ages of sixteen and nineteen.

“17. To enable a person who is convicted on indictment of--(_a_) keeping premises for immoral purposes; or (_b_) living on a woman’s immoral earnings, being a male; or (_c_) persistently soliciting, being a male; or (_d_) selling indecent literature, etc., to be placed under police supervision, notwithstanding that such person has not been previously convicted of crime.

“18. To require courts to recommend for expulsion aliens over the age of nineteen who are convicted of certain offences.

“19. To restrict the punishment for rape to penal servitude for not more than ten years, except under certain aggravated circumstances, when the maximum term is to be fifteen years.

“20. To restrict the punishment for offences under sections fifty-eight and sixty-one of the Offences against the Person Act, 1861, to penal servitude for not more than ten years, and for offences under section sixty-two of that Act to penal servitude for not more than seven years.

“21. To re-enact the Punishment of Incest Act, 1908; to extend its range; and to make such other amendments as are required to render its provisions consistent with the above proposals, the full offence to be felony.

“22. To restrict the punishment of young offenders for any of the above offences (including rape, incest, etc.) by providing--(_a_) that no person under the age of twenty-one shall be liable to a longer term of penal servitude than seven years, unless he is guilty of rape under certain aggravated circumstances, in which case he is to be liable to penal servitude for ten years; and (_b_) that no person under the age of eighteen shall be liable to penal servitude.

“23. To render an indecent assault upon a person under the age of nineteen years, cognizable summarily with the consent of the accused, but to increase the maximum term of imprisonment which a court of summary jurisdiction may, under those circumstances, inflict, to six months. (_Cf._ a similar provision in the Children’s Act, 1908.)

“24. To enable the court to be cleared (representatives of the press being allowed to remain) during proceedings relating to offences against morality or decency, and to enable the worst of such cases to be tried _in camera_.

“25. To repeal--(_a_) The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885; (_b_) The Vagrancy Act, 1898; (_c_) The Punishment of Incest Act, 1908; (_d_) Sections sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, one hundred and twenty-eight (2), of the Children Act, 1908, and the Second Schedule of that Act; (_e_) The Obscene Publications Act, 1857; (_f_) The Indecent Advertisements Act, 1889; (_g_) Other enactments.”

The comprehensive nature of the Morality Bill can scarcely be doubted after a perusal of the foregoing _Memorandum_. There is no question whatever, the bulk of the provisions are good. But the penal offence constituted by a prostitute’s intercourse with a boy under nineteen seems somewhat far-fetched. The intention may be good, though it would look peculiar as a section of a statute. There is no need to comment further on the subject here.

Prior to going through the Bill, the writer had intended suggesting the insertion in it of the following provision: “In any case where it has been proved that a girl was induced to sexual intercourse on the promise or understanding that a theatrical or other engagement was to be the result of such intercourse, or where a theatrical or other engagement has already been obtained and is to be continued only on submission to an act of sexual intercourse with a manager, proprietor, or other person in authority, then such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanour punishable with imprisonment with or without hard labour for any term not exceeding twelve months.” On examining the contents of the Bill, he, however, found the contingency provided for in section 8.

“8.--(1) If any male person shall obtain, or if any person of either sex shall aid or abet any male person in obtaining, connection with any woman by any inducement or threat in connection with her employment in any capacity, or with any attempt on her part to obtain employment in any capacity, such person shall be guilty of felony, and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding two years, or to be kept in penal servitude for any term not less than three years and not exceeding five years. (2) If any male person shall attempt to obtain, or if any person of either sex shall aid or abet any male person in attempting to obtain, connection with any woman by any inducement or threat in connection with her employment in any capacity, or with any attempt on her part to obtain employment in any capacity, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to be imprisoned, with or without hard labour, for any term not exceeding two years.”

There are two classes of enterprise which are peculiarly associated with what may be termed submissive immorality for the purpose of legitimate employment. In the one class the victim’s downfall finds its beginning in connection with theatrical aspirations, whereas in the other class it is indirectly brought about by the demands of fashion. There is reason to believe that a well-formed, good-looking girl, who is anxious to get on the stage will often only accomplish her desire by first submitting to sexual intercourse with her prospective employer. This is not always so, naturally, but it is a general custom in some quarters. In many, if not in most cases, submission means the seduction of a previously virtuous girl. The condition precedent to a theatrical engagement, more particularly on the “musical comedy” stage, is, therefore, of such a character that the harshest measures are needed to put it down. The whole process is iniquitous. On the one hand, there is an eager, inexperienced young woman, foolish enough to want to go on the stage, and on the other, there is a calculating scoundrel who regards her as his certain prey. The second important variation to the offence of carnally knowing a woman, through the influence of her employment, frequently arises in West End milliners’ shops. The employment by male _costumiers_--that is to say, at the most fashionable shops--of attractive young women, who, for their figures and appearance, are chosen as models to display Paris hats and costumes, gives rise to a whole series of iniquitous conditions which would shame the most indecent novel. Models of the sort referred to are generally subjected to much the same treatment as the “musical comedy” aspirants, but there is this difference--that the former usually obtain the engagement before the “cloven hoof” of their employer begins to show itself.

The searchlight of vigilance would consume itself were it applied to half the subjects which pass through one’s mind as suitable for attack. That is to say, in connection with submissive immorality for the purpose of legitimate employment.

II. ACCESSION AND CORONATION DECLARATIONS AND OATHS

This little work would, perhaps, be incomplete without some mention of the Accession Declarations and Coronation Oaths.

It is first proposed to incorporate here the “Declarations of Heads of States” which declarations were collected and ordered to be printed by the House of Commons in May, 1901.

GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

I. _Declaration made by the King, on his Accession, in the House of
Lords, pursuant to section 1 of the Bill of Rights 1 W. & M. sess. 2,
c. 2_.

I, EDWARD, do solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God,
profess, testify, and declare, that I do believe that in the
Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper there is not any transubstantiation of
the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ at
or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever; and that
the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other Saint,
and the sacrifice of the Mass, as they are now used in the Church
of Rome are superstitious and idolatrous, and I do solemnly, in the
presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, that I do make this
declaration and every part thereof in the plain and ordinary sense
of the words read unto me as they are commonly understood by English
Protestants without any evasion, equivocation, or mental reservation
whatsoever, and without any dispensation already granted me for this
purpose by the Pope or any other authority or person whatsoever, or
without any hope of such dispensation from any person or authority
whatsoever, or without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before
God or man, or absolved of this declaration or any part thereof
although the Pope or any other person or persons or power whatsoever
should dispense with or annul the same, or declare that it was null
and void from the beginning.

II. _Oath with regard to the Church of Scotland, taken by the King at
his first Council, on 23rd January, 1901._

I, EDWARD VII., King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland, Defender of the Faith, do faithfully Promise and Swear that
I shall inviolably maintain and preserve the settlement of the true
Protestant Religion, with the Government, Worship, Discipline, Rights
and Privileges of the Church of Scotland as established by the Laws
made there in prosecution of the Claim of Right, and particularly
by an Act, intituled An Act for securing the Protestant Religion
and Presbyterian Church Government, and by the Acts passed in the
Parliament of both Kingdoms for Union of the two Kingdoms.

SO HELP ME GOD.

EMPIRE OF GERMANY.

There is no provision in the constitution of the German Empire for an oath regarding the constitution on the part of the German Emperor; nor does the constitution contain provisions respecting the making of a promise on oath or of other solemn declarations by the Emperor. On the other hand, the King of Prussia, in accordance with Article 54 of the Charter of the Constitution for the State of Prussia, in the presence of the United Chambers of the Prussian Diet, makes a promise on oath “to keep the constitution of the Kingdom fixed and inviolable, and to govern in accordance with it and with the laws.”

UNITED STATES.

The oath or Affirmation taken by the President of the United States before the entrance upon the execution of his office is prescribed by the Constitution of the United States (Article II., section 1), and is as follows:--

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm), that I will faithfully execute the
office of President of the United States, and will, to the best of my
ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United
States.”

FRANCE.

The President of the French Republic takes no Oath on the assumption of office.

AUSTRO-HUNGARY.

The Emperor on his Accession takes the Solemn Oath in the presence of both houses of the Reichsrath--

“To maintain the inviolability of the fundamental laws of the Kingdoms and Provinces represented in the Reichsrath and to rule in accordance with these and the common laws of the Empire.”

The Oath taken by the present Emperor as King of Hungary:

“We, Francis Joseph I., by the Grace of God, etc., as Hereditary and
Apostolic King of Hungary and its Dependencies, swear by Almighty
God, by the Virgin Mary, and by all the Saints of God, to maintain
the Churches of God, the municipal liberties of Hungary and its
Dependencies, as well as the ecclesiastical and lay inhabitants of
those states of every rank, in their rights, prerogatives, freedom,
privileges, laws, in their ancient, good and approved customs; to see
that justice is done all: to maintain intact rights, constitution,
and the legal independence and territorial integrity of Hungary
and its Dependencies: to respect the laws of the late King Andreas
II., not to alienate nor curtail the dominion of Hungary and its
Dependencies, nor whatever belongs to these countries by right or
title, but as far as possible to increase and extend them; and that
we will do all that we are justly able to do for the common welfare,
glory, and increase of these countries. So help us God and all His
Saints.”

A statute of 1910, the Accession Declaration Act, “to alter the form of the Declaration required to be made by the Sovereign on Accession,” provides for the use of the following Oath by the King:--

“I (_here insert the name of the Sovereign_) do solemnly and
sincerely in the presence of God profess, testify, and declare that
I am a faithful Protestant, and that I will, according to the true
intent of the enactments which secure the Protestant succession to
the Throne of my Realm, uphold and maintain the said enactments to
the best of my powers according to law.”

It is not uninteresting to learn the official position of the Sovereign as defined by statute (24 Henry VIII. c. 12.):

“Whereby divers sundry old authentic histories and chronicles, it
is manifestly declared and expressed that this realm of England
is an empire, and so hath been accepted in the world, governed by
one supreme head and King, having dignity and royal estate of the
Imperial Crown of the same:

“Unto whom a Body Politic, compact of all sorts and degrees of
people, divided in terms by names of spiritualty and temporalty, been
bounden and owen to bear, next to God, a natural and humble obedience.

“He being also institute and furnished by the goodness and suffrance
of Almighty God with plenary, whole, and entire power, pre-eminence,
authority, prerogative, and jurisdiction, to render and yield
justice and final determination to all manner of folk, resiants or
subjects within this his realm, in all causes, matters, debates, and
contentions happening to occur, insurge, or begin within the limits
thereof, without restraint or provocation to any foreign princes or
potentates of the world.”

The monarch--Henry VIII.--in whose reign the above was passed swore a Coronation Oath[36] little different to the Oaths of Charles II. and James II., though the Reformation came in between. The Oath taken by Charles II. at his Coronation was worded thus:--

“Sir, will you grant and keep, and by your oath confirm to the
people of England, the laws and customs to them granted by the Kings
of England your lawful and religious predecessors, and namely the
laws, customs, and franchises, granted by the glorious King, St.
Edward, your predecessor, according to the laws of God, the true
profession of the Gospel established in this Kingdom, agreeable to
the prerogative of the Kings thereof, and the ancient customs of this
realm?”

_King_: “I grant and promise to keep them.”

“Sir, will you keep peace and godly agreement (according to your
power) both to God, Holy Church, the clergy, and the people?”

_King_: “I will keep it.”

“Sir, will you (to your power) cause law, justice, and discretion in
mercy and truth to be executed to your judgment?”

_King_: “I will.”

“Sir, will you grant to hold and keep the laws and rightful customs
which the commonalty of this your Kingdom have: will you defend and
uphold them to the honour of God, so much as you lieth?”

_King_: “I grant and promise so to do.”

The Coronation Oath of His Majesty King George V.[37] conformed to the requirements of the William and Mary legislation--which has regulated the subject ever since its passage, with trifling variations.

The late King’s Accession Declaration, which gave religious offence to many of his Majesty’s subjects, has been abated, in pursuance of section 1, Accession Declaration Act, 1910.

“The declaration to be made, subscribed, and audibly repeated by the Sovereign under section 1 of the Bill of Rights and section 2 of the Act of Settlement shall be that set out in the Schedule to this Act instead of that referred to in the said sections.”[38]

FOOTNOTES

[36] CORONATION OATH OF HENRY VIII

“Will ye graunte and kepe to the people of England, the lawes and
the custumes to theym, as of old tyme rightfull and deuoute Kings
graunted, and the same ratefye and conserne by your othe and the
spiritual lawes, custumes, and libertees graunted to the clergy and
people by your noble predecessors and glorious King Seint Edward?”

_The King shall answer_: “I graunte and promytte.”

“Ye shall kepe after your strength and power to the Church of God, to
the clergy and the people, hoole pees and goodely concorde.”

_The King shall answer_: “I shall kepe.”

“Ye shall make to be done after your strength and power equall and
rightfull justice in all your Domes and Judgements, and discrecion
with mercy and trouthe.”

_The King shall answer_: “I will do.”

“Do ye graunte the rightfull lawes and custumes to be holden, and
promytte after your strength and power such lawes, as to the honor
of God shall be chosen by your people, by you to be strengthend and
defended?”

_The King shall answer_: “I graunte and promytte.”

[37] See Appendix F.

[38] _Vide supra._