COERCION OF WIVES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18850, 1 May 1923, Page 8

COERCION OF WIVES

BILL AMENDING AN ANCIENT PRESUMPTION. LORDS DISAGREE. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, March 3. The Criminal Justice Bill discussed in the House cf Lords this week proposes to abolish the well-known presumption, that an offence committed by a wife in her husband’s presence was committed under his coercion. The Lord Chancellor, in moving the second reading of the Bill, said the presumption was a very old one and hold in tho case of all penalties except murder and treason. There had been several cases, some in recent times, where tho judge had felt himself hound by that rule to direct the acquittal of tho wife. It would not be right to say that in all these cases the wife \vould have been convicted, but it was clear from tho language o£ the judges that they would have preferred to leave the matter to the unfettered! judgment of the jury. He believed this presumption ought to come to an end, it was not in relation to conditions prevailing at present. Tho assumption that every husband beat his wife and that every wife wont in terror of her husband, if it was over true, was certainly not true now. Not every wife was a Lady Macbeth; but, generally speaking, wives were free agents, and the question of their guilt or innocence ought to be considered on the facts and not under the compulsion of some such presumption as this.

Lord Buckmastcr said he did not agree with the Lord Chancellor in regard to the assumption that a woman who committed a crime in the presence of her husband did so under coercion. That assumption had been held since long before the Conquest. This law was not, based on foolishness, but on something like 1100 years of wisdom, and ■until quite recently there had not, he believed, been any objection to it. A case recently occurred which caused people to desire that • a woman should be punished with her husband, the public believing that she had equal responsibility. He did not believe there was any case made out for it at all. 1 It was not physical violence but personal influence which a man exercised over his wife, and to deny that was to deny the existence of one of the greatest influences in the world. There were to. bo found not only women but men who were entirely under the influence of others, ana it was difficult to say that they had any will of their own. It was perfectly ridiculous to try to consider this question from the relationship which. existed between their lordships and their wives. It was necessary to consider " that the greater number of women lived in conditions in which they were in the habit ot obeying their husbands and doing what ho required. It had been suggested that that had been altered by recent legislation, but it was not possible to alter human nature by giving women tho vote. Human nature would remain exactly as it was before; and if tor 1100 years the people of this country had believed that a woman who committed a crime in the presence of her husband should bo held to commit it under his influence ho saw no reason why that should be altered. THE JURY TO DECIDE.

Viscount Haldane pointed out that it was not a question of doing away altogether with tie defence that a crime was committed under the coercion of the husband, but of leaving it to the jury to decide whether or not there had been coercion.

Viscount Ullswater said that the presumption was strongly resented by the advocates of women’s rights. If they were to maintain proper and due respect for the law they must embody the customs and wishes of society of til© present day, and not of 1100 years ago. If a woman could prove that she acted under the corccion of her husband, there was little doubt that the jury would acquit her. A great objection to the ill was its title, for it would open the door wide to all manner of amendments by faddists, and they could hot bo ruled out.

Other clauses in the .Bill deal with the abolition of the grand jury system at quarter sessions, and provide that any person making a false statement for the purpose of procuring a passport shall be liable to imprisonment lor two years or a fine of £IOO, or both. Lord Parmoor considered this latter clause “monstrous.”* There is also a clause which enables a magistrate, on the evidence of a police inspector, to issue a warant for search of premises for any indecent or obscene articles to be sold for purposes of gain. The Bill was road a second time.

A fire was .1 if covered in Victoria street, in tho heart of Dargaville. at 10.45 on Sunday night (says a Press Association wire). The building attacked was owned by Mr Costello and occupied by Mr H. W. Davis, plumber. It was a very old one, but the brigSde made a splendid save, not a great deal of damage being done, and that fully covered by insurance. Before going out in cold, wet weather take “NAZOL” cn sugar. This will keep coughs and colds away. Thousands use NAZOL.” 60 doses-is 6d.— Advt.