1921: This text shows the discussion around a clause that was proposed to be added to the Criminal Law Bill in 1921. Catalogue ref: LCO 2/469
The clause would criminalise female same-sex relationships, similar to how male same-sex relationships were criminalised. This source shows how it was ultimately rejected by the House of Lords.
Transcript
After clause 3 insert a new clause:
Any act of gross indecency between female persons shall be a misdemeanour, and punishable in the same manner as any such act committed by male persons under section eleven of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885.
…
LORDS REASONS for disagreeing with certain of the AMENDMENTS made by the COMMONS.
The Lords disagree with the Amendment made by the Commons to insert clause A after clause 3, for the following Reason:
Because the Amendment introduces a new offence which may lead to unlooked for and evil results, and which should not be introduced without the fullest consideration.
- Why do you think this clause was proposed around this time?
- Why do you think this clause was rejected by the House of Lords?
- This source shows how the clause was rejected because it “may lead to unlooked for and evil results”. What do you think are the results they are referring to?
- How does this source show the difference in legal treatment of female same-sex couples and male same-sex couples? Can you think of any reasons for why this difference might have existed?