1492 MR. KER SEYMER, in rising to move Judge to any arrangement which he might that the Bill be read a second time that make. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL was very sorry that he had not the honour of two minutes' conversation with the hon. and learned Member for Enniskillen, because he was perfectly confident that such a conversation would have entirely changed his opinion of this Bill. The appeal now pending was against the decision of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who had held that the old statute of that country had no application to joint-stock banks. If that appeal were successful, the shareholders of the Tipperary Bank would be liable to the full extent of their fortunes. This Bill would not affect that appeal in any single particular, unless the creditors of the Tipperary Bank chose to compromise it and settle the action. Let the House receive the assurance that the creditors either of the British or the Tipperary Bank could not by means of this Bill be stripped of one farthing, save by their own consent, and with the approbation of the Judge. MR. SPOONER asked the hon. and day six months, expressed the reluctance learned Gentleman the Attorney General, which he felt in doing so, not because he whether this Bill, if passed, would interfere was not convinced of the propriety of such with the appeal now pending before the a course, but because he was unwilling to House of Lords in the case of the Tippe- appear to be an opponent of a measure rary Bank. If it did he could not sup- brought in with the view of putting an end port it. to intemperance. Without being a teetotaller, and still less a supporter of that great absurdity the Maine Liquor Law, he felt at the same time as sincere a desire to do everything to encourage temperance and sobriety as any hon. Gentleman present, and he was satisfied that his hon. Friend, in bringing forward this Motion, had been actuated by a deep conviction of the evils arising from drunkenness. That drunkenness was a vice which did prevail in this country to a considerable extent he could not deny, but he did not believe that it had increased of late years. On the contrary, the tendency of things was directly in the opposite direction; while, for the repression of that which remained, he would look rather to the improvement of the habits of the people than to the aid of increased restrictions. Many causes were in operation to diminish drunkenness in this country. First of all there was the greater influence of good example. Not many years ago the example set by people of position, by country gentlemen, and even in many cases by country clergymen, had by no means tended to discourage that vice; but now the tone of society had entirely changed in that respect. Then, again, there were other causes, such as the increased sense of responsibility among employers of labour, and consequently, an increased attention to the welfare of those whom they employed, improved dwellings for the working classes, sanitary improvements, the establishments of parks for the labouring classes, as well as the improved education of both the labourers and their wives, and other general causes of that description, which tended to discourage drunkenness; so much so, in fact, that he did not consider it Utopian to expect a time would come when a drunkard would be regarded with the same discredit by the labouring classes as he was now by the upper classes. Turning to the measure before the House, he thought the traffic in intoxicating liquors certainly required regulation, but not such as the Bill proposed. When it was first brought forward, he was sorry to observe the name of the hon. Member for South Lancashire (Mr. W. Brown) MR. WHITESIDE promised to convey to his noble Friends in the other House the opinion expressed by the Attorney General, for which he had the greatest respect, although he could not altogether subscribe to it. Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question,' put, and agreed to. Main Question put, and agreed to. House adjourned at a quarter after HOUSE OF COMMONS, Wednesday, June 10, 1857. MINUTE.] PUBLIC BILL.-2° Scientific and Literary Societies. SALE OF BEER BILL. SECOND READING MOVED. Order for Second Reading, read, Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time." on the back of the Bill. He (Mr. Seymer) | the system was indefensible. Why should thought this must have arisen from mis- they allow any body of men, no matter take; and he was glad to know that his how respectable, to determine what were hon. Friend had found that he was so far the wants of a neighbourhood. Such a nomistaken as to the object of the measure tion was not to be tolerated for a moment. that he was now going to second the Mo- He did not think the hon. Gentlemen were tion he (Mr. Seymer) had risen to propose. aware to what extent this public-house He thought it possible that his hon. Friend trade was a restricted trade. Two Sessions (Mr. W. Brown) might have been inveigled ago he had moved for some returns which by the licensed victuallers of South Lanca- threw a light upon that point, as far as the shire when the Committee which had been metropolitan districts were concerned. The appointed to inquire into the licensing sys- returns were not complete, but they showed tem had made their Report; that body that during five years there had been 2343 had thought it so important that they were applications for spirit licences, and of these afraid it would not long remain a dead only 493 had been successful, of which 73 letter; they became alarmed, and issued a were from the Tower Hamlets. So that circular to Members of Parliament, which nearly 2,000 applications were unsuccessstated that licences of houses having now ful. He did not mean to say that 2,000 become a matter of settlement, a great individuals had been refused a licence, disarrangement of property would ensue for no doubt the custom was to apply if the Report were embodied in an Act of more than once in the same district, but the Legislature. Doubtless they might simply that there had been 2,000 applicahave some reason for apprehension, many tions rejected. He himself saw a man of them having made large outlay upon yesterday who had applied seventeen times their premises, and entered into entang- for a licence without success, although his ling alliances with brewers, which afforded petition had been most respectably supa reason for dealing cautiously with this ported. Now, he had a right to assume, question, but it did not furnish any reason and he thought no one would dispute the for adhering to a bad system, and one position, that the great majority of those which had been condemned unanimously persons were of good character-certainly by the House of Commons. Now, he had of as good character as the existing licensed on a former occasion been called a young victuallers, and that, therefore, their applifree-trader; that was true, but he was one cations were not refused upon the ground of of those who thinking that a system of character. No; they were refused out of protection to native industry was the true consideration for existing interests, and for policy of the country, had fought the bat- no other reason. He himself had seen this tle against free trade; but now that the case occur;-a respectable man having for cause for which he had contended was lost some years kept a beer-shop, he applied for and the principle of unrestricted compe- a licence to sell spirits, and he was suptition admitted, he wished to see that prin- ported by the clergyman of the parish, by ciple carried to its fullest extent. Even the churchwardens, by the overseers, and while the battle was going on, Dorsetshire most of the respectable inhabitants; but had never asked for protection against he was opposed by an attorney, of course Somersetshire, or Somersetshire against on grounds of public morality. Was it Wiltshire. All that he had contended for public morality that retained that attorney? was, that they should have protection Was it public morality that paid him? No; against those who worked under more ad- it was private monopoly that retained him, vantageous conditions than they did. On and private monopoly that paid him. So the other hand, here were those Lanca- that in England it was highly moral for shire men calling for protection against A, B, C, the existing licensed victuallers, those who sold beer, subject to precisely to have the privilege of making Her Mathe same conditions as themselves. Now jesty's subjects drunk with spirits as well in speaking of the licensing system, let it as beer; but it was very much the reverse not be said he was not addressing himself for D, E, or F to have the same power. to the question. It was proposed by the It was literally a question of the "ins and Bill before them to extend to beer-houses the outs." The present system gave rise to the system of the licensed houses, while great anomalies, and he would mention two the Committee of which he had been a cases of peculiar hardship which had ocMember had condemned the licensing sys- curred. When there was a prospect of the tem altogether; and, indeed, prima facie, railway being carried as far as Weymouth, one of the oldest inhabitants of the town, thinking that more hotel accommodation was required there, bought one of the principal houses in the town for the purpose of fitting it up as an hotel. He accordingly applied to the magistrates for a spirit licence, but the magistrates refused him. Now, in that case there was no pretence of the applicant being an improper character; the application was simply refused in defence of existing interests. Fortunately, however, he was a rich man, and he was able to appeal to the Quarter Sessions against the decision of the magistrates, when the application was unanimously granted. But had he been a poor man, the effect of the present system would have been fatal to him, and a very useful project would have been defeated. The second case which he would cite was that of the refreshment room at the Southampton station. For some time only beer could be procured at that station, as the magistrates had refused to grant a spirit licence, until the inconvenience was felt to be so great that remonstrances were poured in from some of the first people in the land, and eventually the licence was granted. But the very idea of the thing being questioned amounted in his mind to a condemnation of the whole system. They had the strongest possible evidence of the connection between public-houses and beerhouses. The evidence of Mr. Hawes, of Southwark, a most respectable gentleman, and formerly a brewer, left no doubt upon the point. He stated distinctly that he believed a great number of the publichouses belonged to the brewers, both directly and indirectly, and that it was a very common thing for an understanding to exist between the person applying for the licence and the brewer. In some parts of England that connection existed to a much greater extent than in others. For example, Birmingham was quite free from it, while the eastern counties, Northumberland, and the metropolis, were completely under its influence. The brewers were a wealthy class, and he did not envy them their wealth; but at the same time he would never consent to that wealth being applied to the maintenance of an artificial system. Yes, the brewers were a wealthy body of men. He remembered that there was a story told to the effect that one of their body had been in treaty for the purchase of a house in Belgrave Square, but that he had been remonstrated with by three or four other brewers who were residing there already, and who told him it would never do to add to the number. The consequence had been that the gentleman in question had subsided into the comparatively obscure region of Eaton Place. The story, perhaps, might not be quite true, but he could only say si non e vero, e ben trovato. At any rate, he did not want to help these rich brewers to princely palaces in Belgrave Square, by perpetuating their monopoly in the supply of beer to the labouring classes. Still, with respect to the proprietors of the public-houses, it was his opinion that, as a class, they would suffer no injury if a complete change were made in the system by which they were now regulated. Their present position was not, at all events, of a very satisfactory nature, as was clearly demonstrated by the evidence which had been laid before the Committee, testifying to the fact that frequent transfers of those establishments were made from one person to another. Everything that was bad in the system which now prevailed must be traced to the restrictions which it established, and the House might depend upon it that, if that restriction were removed, the result would be, under the auspices of free trade, the sale of better articles in our public-houses, and the provision of better accommodation for the labouring classes, while no greater degree of immorality than at present existed would be found to prevail. Having alluded to the question of immorality, he might mention that Mr. R. Gladstone, who was well acquainted with Liverpool, had stated that, in Dale Street, in that town, a man might get drunk every day in the week, and yet never go into the same house for the purpose twice. He (Mr. Seymer) did not know Dale Street, and he was perfectly ready to admit that the houses referred to might be, for the most part, beer shops; but he thought he could point out streets in the metropolis where a person might get drunk every day in the month upon spirits, without being under the necessity of twice resorting to the same establishment. Indeed, no man could fairly contend that there was the slightest difficulty interposed in the way of a person, with a half-a-crown in his pocket, who was inclined to get drunk upon spirits in any of the large towns throughout the country. There were, he might add, public-houses in the metropolis which were, and always had been, conducted in the most disorderly manner. As he returned home from that Ilouse, he constantly saw drunken persons coming out of those fighters, obtained a public-house, because places night after night, long after the hour they happened to have a good drinking conat which beer-shops were obliged by law nection amongst the "fancy.' All those to be closed. When those establishments discreditable arrangements for prize-fights became so notorious as to attract the were made at such establishments. If any attention of the authorities, their licences hon. Member, for instance, wished to ascerwere, as a matter of general practice, tain by what steamboat he must go, in transferred, and thus the nuisance was order to witness one of those encounters perpetuated from year to year. From in the neighbourhood of the Essex Marshes, certain returns which had been laid upon or by what train he ought to proceed with the table of the House, it might be inferred a similar object, and with a good chance that the great safeguard in such instances of dodging the police, the best course he consisted in the power to refuse a renewal could take would be to frequent the pubof the licences. But how, he would ask, lic-houses to which he had just alluded, did the system really operate? Why, out and get "the office," as it was called. of the 6,000 public-houses in the metropo- He believed, indeed, that upon one oclis there were but thirty-six which had casion a train conveying Her Majesty's not, during the last five years, had a re- Justices of Assize had been shunted off its newal of their licences, and out of those line, in order to allow a train bent upon one thirty-six twelve were situated in South- of those disgraceful expeditions to pass upon wark. That statement, however, did not its way. Beer-shops were not sufficiently put the matter in its true light, for only respectable to be frequented by members of fifteen public-houses had been perma- the prize-fighting fraternity; they, therenently closed in the metropolis during the fore, congregated at the public-houses; and last five years, and of these twelve were at the present moment two licensed victualin Southwark, so that in the whole of the lers were under an engagement to fight remaining portion of the metropolis there for £200 a side, and as meetings were were only three in the cases of which a held from time to time at various houses permanent suspension of their licences had for the purpose of making £10 deposits, taken place. How, under those circum- on the payment of each instalment there stances, could any one contend that the would be a grand carouse and a vast congreat safeguard against immorality was sumption of beer. The last thing, howto be sought in the existence of a power ever, it would appear, which occurred to to refuse to the proprietors of public-houses the authorities was to take away their a renewal of their licences. That was a licences from such places; and the result view of the question which, in his opinion, was that they were allowed to go on in no man of common sense ought for a mo- the manner which he had just described. ment to endeavour to uphold. The next Now, he apprehended that when those point to which he wished to advert was circumstances were taken into account the large sums of money which were paid the House would find it extremely difficult for public-houses, and which Alderman to draw any very wide distinction between Wire, who was the advocate of the licensed beer-shops and public-houses upon the score victuallers, had accounted for before the of morality. It was certain that in some Committee by stating, they were for the low neighbourhoods magistrates had sancmost part paid for the goodwill of those tioned, or at least winked at, practices establishments. Now, he (Mr. Seymer) which they would never have permitted in did not believe that to be the fact, inas- better neighbourhoods. From the evimuch as some of the evidence taken before dence which had been laid before the the Committee had clearly proved that the Committee, he was happy to say it ap enhanced value, to which he alluded, was peared that dangerous adulteration of the allowed to operate in very many instances articles sold in either class of establishbefore these houses had actually been ment did not in any very considerable built; and he, for one, was disposed to degree prevail. The worst species of adulregard that enhanced value as the con- teration which was practised was the putsequence of a restricted trade. It was said ting of salt into the beer, which accounted that the proprietors of public-houses were a for the thirst which those who were in the very respectable class of men, but he had habit of consuming that beverage frenot the fear of Bell's Life so much before quently experienced. The chief mode of his eyes as to call that portion of them adulteration, however, was that of dilution respectable, at all events, who, as prize- by the use of water; and upon that head Mr. Caldwell, who, he believed, was a dan- | productive of much evil where parties were cing-master rather than the proprietor of a pretty evenly balanced, but that when the public-house, had let the Committee into contrary took place the licences were said some of the secrets of the trade. In reply to a question which had been put to him that gentleman said, "We always dash the beer.' "What do you mean by that?" Answer: "Why, we pump the New-river into it." It was but justice to the brewers to say that all their beer was sent out perfectly good; but there was not a single public-house in which, he believed, the beer was not adulterated. Mr. Hawes, who had been himself a brewer, in his evidence said, he had never tasted beer in a public-house that was not adulterated. Although the law strictly forbade adulteration or dilution, that description of offence was constantly practised. He might be told that there were also adulterations practised in the grocery trade, and no one thought of regulating that trade. His answer was, that the law was strong enough to punish such adulterations, when proved. He contended that if the trade were thrown open the public would have the best articles. Now, the House would perceive that, with reference to adulteration, the owner of a public-house stood in a different position from the proprietor of a beer-shop. The former could afford to sell his beer at a small profit, or, in other words, not to adulterate it, inasmuch as the sale of wine and spirits constituted the principal source of his income. The contrary was the case of the man who sold beer alone, because he could not hope to make up by the profits accruing from the sale of wine and spirits for a diminution in the price of that one article. The competition, then, between both stood upon a footing unfavourable to the latter. He wished next to make one or two observations with respect to the bearing of the subject generally upon the character and position of the magistrates. He, for one, must disclaim all intention of casting upon the magistrates the imputation of being influenced in the granting of licences by corrupt motives. It nevertheless very frequently happened that in those towns in which political feeling ran high at the elections a suspicion always attached to the conduct of a magistrate by whom a licence was refused, if the applicant happened to be a member of a different party. One witness who had been examined before the Committee, for instance, having stated that to be the case, had given it as his opinion that the circumstance was not to be granted all in one direction. The |