The Express.
London, England, 1855-08-07 00:00:00

BALE OF BEER BILL.

The Marquis of CLANKICARDIt rose, pureniat to
notice, to move." That the @Meet committee appointed by
the Howe of Commons having recommended an immediate
amendment of the Bale of Beer Let of 1844, the:circumstan-
ces which render legislation essential on the subject matter
of the bill which has been passed by the H .use of Commons
are of such urgency as to reader the immediate considera-
tion of the ease necessary." This measure affected the
well being of a large number of the people, and it was im-
portant that the session should not terminate without the
question bell% settled in some degree. The act of last year
was oaly passed at the end of the *ravioli, and came into
operation io August. Great discontent was at once en.
cited, and tte question was raised early in the present
session, but as the government were unable to take the
matter into their bands, a private member of the other
house was obliged to take the initiative. Oa the 28th of
June a select committee was appointed to inquire into the
working of the set of last stoma ; they made their
report so the 28th of July, sad the present bill, founded oa
their reirommeadatioc, was immediately introduced, and

passed through all its stayes with lit& or no oppositior.
Their lordships would ass that it wu impossible for soy bill

to come before them wish greater recommendations for I
urgency. This bill came before them recommended by the
g ~,,, meat and by the almost unanimous voice of the other
house of parliament, the two Commissioners of Police, and
14 out of 16 magistrates of the metropolis had given evidence
in f fit, and during the present &4111311 the petitions
is f of it, presented to the other house of parliament,
had been signed by the enormous number of 442,636 per-
sons. The present law seriously iocionvenienced the large
number of excursionists who left London every Sunday.
The returns showed that 12,000 of these a 'rived too late to
get any refreshment if the public-houses closed at 10
o'clock. It might be said, they ought to go home in-
stead of to the pub:ie-houses. That might do very
well for their lordship, who had something better
than water at home, but the great msj Ray of thme
people had nothing in their bowie but water, and that even
• not good. They ought to do every thing in their power to
promote the recreation and excursions of these people who
lead to labour hard for gig days in the week ; an alteration
in the law was now urgently required, as these excursions
were most irequett in the months of August and Septembi r.
The present law was a source of greet birdship to the large
class of persona in the metropolis who kept no liquor is
their house, but were accustomed to send to the public
house for what they required. The act of last motion bed
not in the least decreased drunkenness. Evert if it had,
they had no right, in order to p a few persons from
indulging in a reprehensible habit, to subject thousands and
tens of thousands to an inconvenience which they felt must
monthly, and with which they were most seriously discon-
tented There could be no doubt that the recent demon-
strati ms in the metropolis had been greatly increased and
strengthened in consequence of the grievances created
by the present law. The closing of the public
houses at ten o'clock produced nu practical good,
as the evidence showed that drinking in im-
proper and disreputable places had greatly increased.
They could not prevent Sunday intosiestio:s altogether for
many years to come. But a great improvement had been
going on rapidly for many years, and it would proceed still
further if the people were allowed to enjoy other modes of
recreation, and to indulge in innocent amusements. There
could be no more useful or beneficial amusements than
theme affor.led by the excursion trains to which ha had
already referred. People meat to Chepstow, Salisbury, and
other places at a considerable distaste from London for
recreation, and it was impossible to get back before lon
o'clock. On these grounds he begged to move that the
standing order be suspended.
Lord REDESDALE did not think that the noble mar-
quis had made out a case of urgency to juetify the suspen-
sion of the standing order. The question was whether
there was that extent of urgency which should induce them
to proceed with the bill without inquiry. Certainly not.
It was evident that on the 20th of Julie the House of Com-
mons did not consider the case to be one of urgency, fur
they only appointed a committee to inquire into the state of
the law. (Hear, hear.) That committee stated in their report
that the evidence had net been taken far enough. (Hear )
There was a compromise of parties in the commtitee.
Would their lordship then, under such circumstances,
suspend the standing order ? Ile begged them to consider
that it was no light matter to set it snide. Boring the two
seseHts that it bad existed it worked well, and that he be•
Steed was the opinion of the House of Commons itself; but
its eff et would be lost if they proceeded to consider bids
which were sot of real urgency. Of the witnesses who
were examined by the Hose. of Commons committee 25
were from the metropolis, and but one from the country—a
magistrate from North Wilts, whose evidence was in favour
of the law as it stood. (Hear, hear.) Very little inconve-
nient), would result from postponing the consideration of
the measure for another seseime, es the period of excursion
trains wmald not extend beyond the ensuing month. It was
proved in evidence that there were se many excursionists
arriving is London between 11 end 12 o'clock as between
10 and 11, so that there was as strong • ease on that ground
for keeping the public-houses open till 12 o'clock as 11.
(Hear, beer.) He should therefore oppose the motion of
the noble nougats.
Lord LYTTELTON said that the more important the
unsure the more it required to be considered. The or
geney should be indisputable to justify them in suspending
the order of the house. The measure was only recommended
by a committee of the House of Commons, and he appre-
hended their lordships would not take that as a sufficient
ground of authority. They should have a reference to a
select committee of their own horse. He did not mutest
the bill at all, but that was a different matter from the
question now under consideration.
Earl GRANVILLE thought that the case of urgency
was made out, if there were sufficiently stomg political or
other reasons for earryiekthe metienre. (Hear.) This was
not a matter of compromise at all, as the nub's lord seemed
to think. He believed the opinion of the committee was
unanimous as to the inconvenience to the public from the

existing law, and the different interpretations put upon it
by &direst magistrates. He could hardly conceive a case
of greater urgency than one where there were different in-
terpretations of the eau law by the constituted authorities ;
and as to the ineonvenienee to the public, that was shown as
clearly as if there had been evidence from all parts of the
country.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY admitted that the law
sight be amended, and even related, but he thought that
on the 6th of August they ought to stand on the order of
the house, on the faith of whith so many peers had left
town, aa, in tie opinion, no ease of urgency had been Beta.
blisbed. Some inconvenience there mght be from the pre-
sent law, but it was not so great that this measure might
sot be palpated WI nut session. He believed the only
ague, in the case wee this, that if the law was not re.
this session it would ant be repealed at all. The
sd
friends of the seating law tendered evidence in its favour,
but the eaunittu declined to receive it. Out of 30 wit-
noises who were summoned from the country but one was
examined. How could it be maintained that the am was
one of urgency when the evidence wax one-sided sad im-
perfect, and when it was certain that • large proportion of
the working people themselm were in favour of the law?
Those who would force this bill on the house were making
the Here of Ueda& more satistretion °Sloe for the House
of Commons, without any deliberate action or right of in-
dependent inquiry. (Hear.)
Earl ORANYIL said that the committee had rejected
to beer the evidence tendered by the supporters of the law
at the one hand, and by the licensed victuallers on the
other. They took the evidence of the magistrates, and per.
souse( that hind. It could not be said, therefore, that the
evidence wee onnsided.
The But of HARD WICKS said he should support the
reeehaties of the noble marquk, became he thought that the
bW contained only a wire and proper relaxation of the law-
He thought that public-houses ought to be cloud during the
been of divine service, and lige at a proper and reasonable
hour of the night. This nag sot only for the advantage of
the negotiable and religiously disposed, but for the advantage
pt the working classes themselves, Se they would be better