PROCESSIONING.

Open-air preaching in itself is now regarded as lawful. Open-air preaching upon a highway so as to attract a crowd occasions wilful obstruction, and wilful obstruction is unlawful. It also inconveniences the public, and therefore becomes a nuisance. Processioning is lawful.

CHAPTER IX.

SOCIAL PURITY.

PROCEEDINGS AGAINST DISORDERLY HOUSES.

THE principal Act relating to this subject is the 25th George II., c. 35 (1752).

Sec. 5 of that Act provides, that in order to encourage prosecutions against persons keeping bawdy houses, gaming houses, or other disorderly houses, if any two inhabitants of any parish give notice in writing to the Constable of such parish, he shall forthwith go with such inhabitants before a Magistrate, and (upon such inhabitants making oath that they believe the contents of such notice to be true, and entering into a recognisance in the sum of £20 each to give or produce material evidence) enter into a recognisance in the penal sum of £30 to prosecute such person at the next General or Quarter Session of the Peace, and in case such person shall be convicted, the Overseers shall pay the sum of £10 to each of such inhabitants.

This means £10 for each person convicted, so that if there are three persons arrested (as often happens) and convicted, the Overseers have to pay £30 to each complaining inhabitant.

By Sec. 6 the Magistrate is thereupon to issue his warrant against the accused, and bind him over to appear and answer any bill that may be found against him, and take security for his good behaviour in the meantime.

By Sec. 8, any person who shall appear to act or behave as master or mistress, or as the person having the care or management of the house, shall be deemed the keeper thereof.

In 1818, the 58th George III., c. 70, was passed, and by Sec. 7 of that Act the Overseers are also to be served with notice, and they may be bound over to prosecute instead of the Constable.

CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1885.

No alteration in the Law took place until 1885, when the Criminal Law Amendment Act was passed. By Sec. 13 of this Act it is provided that any person who:

(1) Keeps or manages or acts or assists in the management of a brothel, or

(2) Being the tenant, lessee, or occupier of any premises knowingly permits such premises or any

part thereof to be used as a brothel, or for the purpose of habitual prostitution, or

(3) Being the lessor or landlord of any premises, or the agent of such lessor or landlord, lets the same or any part thereof, with the knowledge that such premises or some part thereof, are, or is to be used as a brothel, or is wilfully a party to the continued use of such premises or any part thereof as a brothel, shall on summary conviction be liable

(1) To a penalty not exceeding £20, or to imprisonment not exceeding three months, with or without hard labour, and

(2) On a second or subsequent conviction, to a penalty not exceeding £40, or to imprisonment for any term not exceeding four months, with or without hard labour.

And in case of a third or subsequent conviction such person may, in addition to such penalty or imprisonment, be required to enter into a recognisance, with or without sureties, to be of good behaviour for twelve months, and, in default, may be imprisoned for any period not exceeding three months, in addition to any such term of imprison

ment.

Any person being summarily convicted under this Section may appeal, and the Enactments in the Acts of George II. and George III. above referred to, are, with the necessary modifications, deemed to apply to prosecutions under this Section.

There are, therefore, three modes of procedure at present:

(1) Under the Acts of George II. and George III.

(2) Under the Act of 1885.

(3) Under the three Acts combined.

Soon after the Act of 1885 was passed, one of the Magistrates at the Marlborough Street Police Court declined to issue warrants under the old law on the ground of its cumbersome and necessarily expensive procedure, and the hardship of burdening the ratepayers generally with so many sums of £10, but on mandamus he was held by the Queen's Bench Division to be wrong. Notwithstanding this decision, proceedings under the old law are not looked upon with favour.

It has been recently decided by the Queen's Bench Division that a prostitute living in a house, and receiving men there, does not make the house a brothel. (Singleton v. Ellissen, Law Times Reports, Q.B.D., 1895.)

THE VAGRANCY ACT, 1898.

By the 61 & 62 Vict., c. 39, known as the Vagrancy Act, 1898, every male person who knowingly lives wholly or in part on the earnings of prostitution, or in any public place persistently solicits or importunes for immoral purposes, shall be deemed a rogue and vagabond within the meaning of the