View report page

2
the Vestry itself taking the initiative without waiting for complaints by
householders, your Committee is unable to recommend them for adopt ion
for the reasons hereinafter set forth.
The original Act dealing with these houses (25 Geo. II., c. 36)
required any constable, upon receiving notice in writing by any two
ratepayers of any person keeping such a house, to forthwith go with such
inhabitants before a justice, and, upon such inhabitants entering into
their recognizances to produce material evidence, to himself enter into
a recognizance to prosecute, and the only duty it cast upon the Overseers
was that of recouping the constable the expenses of the prosecution
and of paying to each of such ratepayers the sum of £10 in case of
conviction.
By the 58 Geo. III. c 70, the last mentioned Act was amended by a
proviso that a copy of the notice to be given to the constable should in
every case be given to the Overseers, and that if they should elect to
enter into a recognizance to prosecute instead of the Constable they
might do so, and proceed as the latter was directed to do by the former
Act; but if they did not so elect, the Constable was still to prosecute,
and to be liable to penalties if he neglected so to do.
So the law remained until the passing of the Criminal Law Amendment
Act, 1885, which enacted that not only the keeper of a disorderly
house, but also the owner or lessee, and anyone who assisted in keeping
such a house might be prosecuted in a summary manner as
provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. This Act also fixed the
penalties for convictions in such cases, and it further provided that the
Acts previously referred to should with the necessary modifications be
deemed to apply to these summary prosecutions, simply substituting
the latter for the old and tedious process of indictment.
It must therefore be borne in mind that the only duty imposed
by legislation upon Overseers (in which capacity alone the Vestry acts) is
that of paying the cost of the prosecution including £10 to each of the
ratepayers who set the Constable in motion.
Your Committee finds that during the four years the administration
of these Acts has been entrusted to it by the Vestry, there have
been 26 convictions out of 28 prosecutions, but that 228 houses have been
closed during the same space of time in consequence of notices served by
the Vestry's Constable (G. Mason) acting under the directions of your
Committee or of the Vestry Clerk.