The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1876-06-17 00:00:00

TEE STOURBRIDGE OBSERVER_

The Hon. 17. Pox, the :ate Premier of ;gels Zealand, eluding the coaatguarleigley, put off at entliro render
seconded the motion in a lively speech, and it was also a-sistance. Most-of the bodies were lecovered during
carried, as was the following : the afternoon and removed to the "Victoria Tavern"
"That, iz the opinion of this meettntsl, a terrible amount for identification.
cf vice, misery, crime, and every form of preventible evil
results from the action of Parliament in refusing to pass the The names of the dead are—Samuel Haggett, boat-
Permissive Bill into law, and this meeting would, therefore, man Eastbourne; Edward Parker, 22, carpenter,
make a respectful and fervent aeneal to the members of the Rotherfield • Geowge Payne, 22, carpenter, Rotber-
House of Commons, and to both Parties in th., State, not to field; Frederick Wood, 25, carpenter, Shoreham ;
incur the serious responsibility of further refusing to the Edward Carpenter, 19, railway porter, Bedbamp-
suffering districts of the country that means of legislative
relief which the Permissive Bill, if enacted, would place at ton; William Rogers, 25, blacksmith, Wesham ;
their disposal" Edwin Poole, labourer, place of abode unknown;
A petition to Parliament was also adopted, and the Henry Russell, 25, fireman, Eastbourne ; his brother
meeting closed with thanks to the Chairman. Alfred RuFsell, labet, Eastbourne ; Jacob Baker,
I labourer, Eastbourne .; and the little boy Grows, son
of John Groves, Eastbourne; and another which was
not then known. All are single men except Baker and
'Liggett.

CONFERENCE OF LICENSED VICTUALLERS.

, A Conference (,f delegates from Associations of th
Licensed Victualler? trade was held on Tuesday after
noon- at the We3tminater Palace Hotel to discuss
points of Sir Wilfred Lawson's Permissive Bill affect-
ing the trade interests. The chair. was taken by Mr.
Wheelhouse, M.P. The tneeting was well attended,
it ibeing stated that delegates from all parts of the
country were present.
The Chairman, in opening the proceedings, said that they
had met to deal with—but he thought he.
,ought rather
to say against—the Bill which was down for second' read,
log in the House of Commons on Wednelalay. The present
Prohibitory Permissive Liquor Bill was not the only one
they would have to look after; but to deal with the one
In question, he regretted that sir Wilfrid Lawson had again
introduced the Bill, for he was sure that there never was a
House of Commons which there was less chatce of con-
vincing that the measure was wise, just, and necessary than
the present one. It was a Bill with a foregone conclusion,
and he regretted the time that would be wasted on the die-
m: sion of it, for It was certain to he bowled out of the
House very quickly when it came to the vote. He quite
aereed with the statement that drunkenness was a curse
to the country, but he felt sure that the licensed victualler
(Milked to see it, and to know that it existed as much as any
man. It was a question of the liberty of the subject, and
though it might be the opinion of Sir Wilfrid Lawson that
water was the best drink, Englishman had a right to decide
that question for themselves. The object of the Bill was to
put into the hands of tho mai srity of the ratepayers all pub-
lichouses, all breweries, and, what he might call the chances
of obtaining a glass of publichouse wine. But would that be
lair? ("No.") He asked, then, to be dealt with on the old
principle of "All square all fair." Practically it would take
from the poor man his chance of getting his beer and leave
the rich man his club and his champagne or whatever he
wanted. Bat that would be to deal unfairly with the
poorer man, and that he would never consent to. He
had been told that it wou'd diminish the Dumber of
publichouses ; but the answer was tho same—he would not
interfere with the liberty of the subject. Ile was certain that
the Bill would never atop drinking. He was sure that if
grounds ter publicheuse,s were allowed, the outer
circle of such grounds would be a mass of publichouses, and
the evil would he greater. It wou,cl also cause private
drinking, and seed it into underground cellars and secret
'places where illicit dealers would make great profits, because
they were liable to magisterial interference. The argument
that it was necees:ry to curb the drunkard was no reason for
making the innocent suffer. Even did the- Bill pass, the
drunkards would be drunkards still, by cheating the law and
be revenue. He denied that the Bill was a publican's ques-
tion, but asserted that it was a public question.
Mr. Wetenhall, chairman of the London Protection
Association, then proposed as one resolution the following :
"1 That the Permissive Bill ought to be opposed, because
it would have for its effect the promotion of locel strife in
every district in which it was introduced. 2. Because, if
enforced, a monstrous and uncompensated extinction of a
necessary and legitimate occupation would take place. 3.
Because it would grossly interfere 'with the individual
freedom of a large section of the inhahitants. 4. Because
it would not accomplish its professed object of diminishing
drunkennesr. 0 i the contrary, it would lead to secret
drinking in prohibited districts, and, drive the inhabitants
into adjoining loaalities where no such restrictions pre-
vailed. 6. Because bishops, senators, and statesmen have
denounced the measure as impolitic and unjust, and the
present House of Commons has rejected it by overwhelming
majorities. 6. Because the persons and sections of society
who support the measure are notoriously those who are
least practically conversant with the wants and wishes of
the classes who would be injuriously affected by such legisla-
tion." •
Quoting a remark by Cardinal Manning, that he wished this
question could be dealt with by the old English way of
popular vote, Mr. Wetenhall said- the House of Commons
wait returned by popular vote as it was understood in this
couatry, and the Permissive Bill had been kicked out of that
House year after year by triumphant majerities.
Mr. Wadhams, of Birmingham, chairman of the National
Licensed Victuallers' Dsfence Association, seconded the reso-
lution, and in the course of his remarks he denied
England was a drunken country, or anythina of the kind.
Mr. Homer and Mr. Candelet supported the resolution.
The latter speaker said the second reading of the Permissive
Bill was looked on in the House ( f Commons as an occasion
of recreation and fummaking. He stated that a circular had
been sent out by the other side to members of Parliament,
asking them, it they could not vote for the Bill, to be absent
at the second reading. (Laughter.) •
The resolution was carried unanimously.

that I

On the motion of Mr. Cleaver (Leicester), seconded by Mr.
Thurston (London), a past chairman of the Licensed Victual-
lers' Protection Society, it was resolved to forward the r, so-
Luton to members of Parliament with a request that they
would be in their places to vote against the BilL
On the motion of Mr. Homer, F eo3nded by Mr. Candelet,
both of whom spoke highly cf Colonel Richards's service's
to tne trade, the following resolution was passed unani-
mously :

"That the representatives of the London and provincial
trade societies hive heard NS ith feelings of deep regret of the
decease of Colonel Richards, the editor of the Morning
Advertiser, and hereby record their profound sympathy with
the bereaved family; that the trade feel that by the de ttli of
Colonel Richards they have lost an earnest and faithful
friend, anti a powerful advocate of every movement in which
the trade have been interested; and that this resolution be
transmitted to the family of the deceased gentleman."
A vote of thanks to the Chairman concluded the
proceedings. .

On Tuesday Mr. Cross, the libme Secretary, received a
numerous deputation, who waited on him to present the
memorial adopted at a public meeting In Hyde Park on Whit
Monday, in favour of Sir Wilfrid Lawson's Permissive Pro-
hibitory BIEL In answer. to the addresses of the several
speakers, Mr. Cross st:11 that he would in another place
give his reasons for not supporting the bill as desired ;
but he remarked that le,listattou could do very
little in the matter. " said, "individual habits and
in,tividual ex.:triple could do a great deal. lany nf those
present, proba'ay all of them, had felt, whatever was their
sphere of life, tbat each man could exercise an enormous in-
fluence over his fellow man for good or evil, and each one
present could feel that he had done much, by precept arid
example to do good in this way—a woik which he knew was
growing, many working men whom ha knew setting an
example of what was right, and deprecating what was wrong
In this matter. Upon that point he was with them, but upon
their proposed legislation he differed with them."

L'ocy'
us I

charge of fortune. ni,ba3