to arrange for international treatment of the subject generally.

The British attitude was indicated by the Foreign Minister (Sir Edward Grey), in a speech in Parliament in July, 1908. After referring to the investigations in progress, he Isaid that it would be known in a reasonable time whether or not the Government thought they had a case for approaching other powers, and, if so, what were the grounds and propositions they should ask those powers to agree to. More recently-indeed, little more than a year ago-Lord Morley stated in Parliament that the investigations of the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas were not completed. He pointed out the broad and important interests. involved, and said that before the British Government could agree to an International Convention providing for control of the fisheries and spawning grounds beyond the three-mile limit, the investigations must be brought, if not to a close, at all events to a further stage than had then been reached. At the same time a similar statement was made by Sir Edward Grey. There the matter remains. If, as suggested in the report from a committee in 1908, which has already been quoted from, the various existing agencies, international and other, are not adequate, then steps should be taken to improve them. When an international conference was held in 1901 at Christiania, the instructions to the British delegates pointed out that the consideration of the subject would not admit of any delay, and the delegates were to urge the importance of entering at once upon the pursuit of investigations calculated to lead to an international agreement. In these circumstances one would have supposed that now, after the lapse of eleven years, we ought to be able to say that the investigation of the facts has been carried far enough, and that opinion has developed sufficiently to allow of definite steps being taken. Has not the time come when an international conference, constituted on the widest possible basis, should be convened to consider the subject of fishery regulation, along with the settlement of general principles to govern the international aspect of the whole question of maritime dominion?

Bristol, England.

M. SANFORD D. COLE.

CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 1912.

The Criminal Law Amendment Act which has created so much discussion in Great Britain and France, is here published in full.—Ed.

The following circular has been issued by the Home Office:

I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit to you herewith, for the information of the justices of your Bench, a copy of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1912, which received the Royal Assent on Friday last, the 13th December, and came at once into operation.

The Act amends the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, and the Vagrancy Act, 1898, in important particulars relating to the offences of procuration, the suppression of brothels, the offence of living on the earnings of prostitution, and the offence of solicitation for immoral purposes by male persons. Its chief provisions are aimed at those persons who as their profession or means of livelihood live on the prostitution or vice of others.

The only section of the Act which appears to the Secretary of State to require any detailed explanation is section 7. The object of this section was to strengthen and extend the provisions of the Vagrancy Act, 1898, but, owing to successive amendments in the House of Commons and in the House of Lords, and owing also to the necessity of dealing in one clause with the law of Scotland, and of Ireland, as well as with the English law, its provisions are somewhat complicated. It appears therefore to be desirable to set out its effect in the form which the Vagrancy Act, 1898, would assume if it were re-enacted with the amendments which have now been made.

The following is, the Secretary of State is advised, a correct statement of the law as it affects England and Wales, though he need not say that, if any doubtful point of construction should arise, it can be authoritatively determined only by a Court of law.

(1) Every male person who

(a) knowingly lives wholly or in part on the earnings of prostitution; or

(b) in any public place persistently solicits or importunes for immoral purposes.

shall be deemed a rogue and vagabond within the meaning of the Vagrancy Act, 1824, and may be dealt with accordingly. [1898, section 1 (1).]

(2) Where a male person is proved to live with or to be habitually in the company of a prostitute, or is proved to have exercised control, direction or influence over the movements of a prostitute in such a manner as to show that he is aiding, abetting, or compelling her prostitution with any other person, or generally, he shall, unless he can satisfy the Court to the contrary, be deemed to be knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution. [1898, section 1 (3) amended by 1912, section 7 (1).]

(3) 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 deemed to be a rogue and vagabond within the meaning of the Vagrancy Act, 1824, and may be dealt with accordingly. [1912, section 7 (4).]

(4) The period of imprisonment with hard labour which may be awarded to a person deemed to be a rogue and vagabond under the foregoing provisions shall be increased to six months, but such person shall not be liable to be dealt with as an incorrigible rogue within the meaning of the Vagrancy Act, 1824. Save as aforesaid, nothing in this sub-section shall affect the powers of a Court of summary jurisdiction to deal with a person deemed to be a rogue and vagabond under the foregoing provisions, anything in any other Act to the contrary notwithstanding. [1912, section 7 (2) (4).]

(5) A person charged with an offence under the foregoing provisions may, instead of being proceeded against as a rogue and vagabond, be proceeded against on indictment, and on conviction on indictment shall be liable to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding two years, and, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction (such second or subsequent conviction being a conviction on indictment) the Court may, in addition to any term of imprisonment awarded, sentence the offender if a male to be once privately whipped, and the number of strokes and the instrument with which they shall be inflicted shall be specified by the Court in the sentence. [1912, section 7 (5).]

(6) The wife or husband of a person charged with an offence under the foregoing provisions may be called as a witness either for the prosecution or defence and without the consent of the person charged, but nothing in this provision shall affect a case where the wife or husband of a person

charged with an offence may at common law be called as a witness without the consent of that person. [1912, section 7 (6).]

(7) If it is made to appear to a Court of summary jurisdiction, by information on oath, that there is reason to suspect that any house or any part of a house is used by a female for purposes of prostitution, and that any male person residing in or frequenting the house is living wholly or in part on the earnings of the prostitute, the Court may issue a warrant authorising any constable to enter and search the house and to arrest that male person. [1898, section 1 (2).]

The saving in section 7 (2) of the new Act (paragraph (4) above) for the powers of a Court of summary jurisdiction should be noted. The effect of this saving is to exclude the operation of section 17 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, as the application of that section would diminish the powers of a Court of summary jurisdiction by giving the defendant the option of claiming to be committed for trial on indictment. In this respect a Court of summary jurisdiction will have the same power of dealing finally with offences under the above provisions as it has of dealing with assaults which by the terms of section 17 of the Act of 1879, are excepted from the operation of that section; subject, of course, to the right of appeal to quarter sessions conferred by the Vagrancy Act, 1824. The Court will, however, if it thinks fit, have the option under paragraph (5) above of committing a case for trial to quarter sessions or assizes when much severer penalties may be imposed.

On the other hand the Court will no longer have power to deal with an offender as an incorrigible rogue (paragraph (4) above.)

The powers of arrest given under section 6 of the Vagrancy Act 1824 will continue to apply to offences under paragraph (1) and will apply to offences under paragraph (3).

CASES UNDER CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT.

Four cases of importance were dealt with by the Court of Criminal Appeal on February 3rd; three were appeals against sentences of flogging; the fourth related to a point of evidence. In Rex v. Timothy Patrick O'Connor the prisoner had been convicted at the Central Criminal Court of procuring for immoral purposes" and had been sentenced by Mr. Justice Darling to eighteen months' hard labour and 30 strokes of the cat. The latter part of the sentence was passed in pursuance of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1912, sec. 3; but as that statute only came into operation on December 13th, while the prisoner was arrested on December 7th for an offence committed in the earlier part of 1912, it was doubtful whether the power to inflict a sentence of flogging conferred for the first time by the statute could apply to such a case, and the learned Judge granted a certificate to appeal against his own sentence. As was anticipated in these columns in commenting on the case at the time (January 25th), the Court of Criminal Appeal held that the power so conferred did not apply to the case of a prisoner arrested before the statute, for sec. 8 says that: "this Act shall not apply to proceedings pending at the commencement of this Act." Proceedings, the Court held, commence in criminal cases at the date when information is laid and a summons issued. The sentence, accordingly, was altered by quashing that part of it which related to flogging and substituting a further period of six months' hard labour, making two years in all. The prisoner had also appealed against the conviction on the ground that the evidence of the woman procured was not corroborated as required by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, in the case of such offences. The Court held that there was sufficient corroboration of her story in the fact that she had been an innocent woman before her marriage with the prisoner, but within a week afterwards had been seen on the. streets acting as a common prostitute while he was hanging about engaged in watching her.

In another case under the new Criminal Law Amendment Act, Rex v. Austin, it was decided that-except so far as pending proceedings are concerned-the statute is retrospective. In other words, a person convicted of an