The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-15 00:00:00

MAY 15, 1860.

ed to be open where spirituous liquors could be
obtained on those days.
Sir J. SHELLEY said he could not help thinking that if
the licensed victuallers and beer-shop keepers—in whose
houses so many evils were conooeted—were allowed to have
their places open on Sundays, there could be no memo why
a better class of houses for refreshment should not be open
on Sundays. If the t wai good as it affected the
refreshment houses of t e lower and middle classes, it must
also hold good as it regarded those houses or places, such as
the Reform Club and other dubs, where gentlemen could
always obtain what they desired on Sundays. They ought
to show that these new houses would be tippling
end used for other purposes than for refreshment, before
they rejected the proposition of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer.
Mr. ILER SEYMER said everything depended upon the
character of these houses. There could be no doubt that
those who believed the bill would do mischief would be glad
to close these houses on Sunday. He thought, however,
there could be no objection to keep them open durite
same hours se heer.ses were allowed to keep their
open. It was all very well for those who were enabled to
take plenty of exercise every day in the week to stay at
home on Sundays, but he could not ask the two millions and
a half of people in London to stay at home on Sundays, and
then if they did go out, he thought they should have an
opportunity of taking some refreshment (Hear, hear.)
Mr. V. SCULLY said he voted against the bill. But if
these houses were to be opened on week days, they ought
to be opened on Sundays. He supposed that if thin clause
were rejected, a gentleman wbo wag An the habit of drink.
bag Ms botile of old port at his club every day in the week
would not be able to obtain a suppl on Sunday, but be
compelled to obtain sprits instead. (Laughter.)
Mr. SPOONER said tie argument in reference to clubs
had no foundation whatever, bemuse they required no
licensee. Gentlemen who took refreshment there took it at
their own houses. They did not require the authority
of parliament, and nobody but themselves were guilt of
desecrating the Sabbath. But if licenses were granted to
these refreshment houses they would hays the authority of
parliament to enable then to desecrate the Sabbath, a mat-
ter which all were earnestly desirous of putting down. He
could not subscribe to the doctrine of the right hon. gen-
tleman the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaater as to his
construction of the law of Chula the Second, and he
thought the committee ought to exert its power and pre-
vent these houses being opened on Sundays. (Hear.)
- ---- • - - - - _

Mr. BAINES said be had only • few words to say by way
of explanation—first, that it was his intention to press his
motion to a division ; and, secondly, that he did not pm-
pose to alter the law of the lend. His amendment had
reference solely to the wine shops and drinking-hours
which were to be established by the new law.
Mr. LOCKE said he wished to call attention to the
existing state of the law. The beta under which Sunday
trading was at percent regulated wise an act, of Charles 11. for
England and Wales, and an act of William 111. for Deland.
By the former statute it was provided that its regulations
should not extend to prohibit the dressing of meat in
families, or the droning and selling of meat and wine in
inns, cookshops, and victuallers' houses, nor the selling of
milk before certain hours, of mackerel, he. The spirit and
beer houses were not to be closed except during the hours
of divine service. It was quite obvious, therefore, that if
the hon. gentleman succeeded in his amendment, he would
be altering the law, for he proposed to make it illegal for
any meson to go into one of these refreshment houses, buy
and drink a glass of wine. He (Mr. Locke) could hardly
conceive that the house would come to such • con-
dusk@ as that. This was taking a puritanical view
of the Sabbath indeed. Aecording to hon. gentlemen
who took this view, people wise to get up and dress them-
selves. He did not know whether they were to wash or
not ; in some very strict watering places bathing ma-
chines were not allowed to go out on Sunday. In abort,
the country was to revert to the religious observances of the
days of Oliver Cromwell. (Divide.) He would only add
that if thehon. member for Leeds wished to go fully into this
subject, there was • bill coming down from the Lords
which would apply not only to these refreshment homes
but to the clubs abo—(hear, hear)—when the whole
questiont be agitated, debated, and settled.
HA
Mr.
upon those bon. gentlemen who wished to see the Sabbath
more strictly observed the desire to abridge the comforts
and happinem of the working classes. (Hear, hear.) The
proposition before the house was whether the country was
to continue to observe the Sabbath day, or whether it was
gradually and progreseively to relax its efforts and do
nothing whatever either towards keeping the Sabbath or
not. He should support the motion of the hon. gvntleman.
Mr. JAMBS said that there were groat anomalies in the
hon. memher's amendment. The effect of it would be to
give an entire monopoly to the licensed victuallers by
completely closing the refreshment homes. With
these motives, which the home well knew that
the honourable member entertained, did he think that
lby this means of promoting the better—or rather the
bitter"—observance of the Sabbath, that he was really
diminishing its desecration ? It was very well for those
who lived in luxurious houses, surrounded by comforts and
relaxations, to say—Stay at home on the Sunday ; but it
was a very different thing for the poor, toiling, working
millions, whom they saw abroad on that day. By whom,
be would ask, were the clubs frequented ? Why, to
extent, by those who bad domestic ties ehowhere.
what miserable, wretched hypocrisy was it to talk of dese-
crating the Sabbath, when they saw four-in-hand clubs
going down to Greenwich to dine on the Sunday! (Hear,
hear.) If they wished to commit the country to such a
course of asceticism, the question ought to be brought be-
fore the house in • definite manner.
Mr. FELLOWEIi said he fullyy believed there was no
country in which there was lon deserration of the Sabbath
than in England, and that wee the very ration why he
supported the amendmest. He had no wish to take a
puritanical view of this question. He would not dispute
with the hon. and learned member for Southwark whether
these houses could or could not be kept open by law. If
they could be kept open by law, all he would say was, why
make the state of things worse than it was at present? By
opening these new refreshment houses they were only en-
couraging drunkenness to the fullest extent. If there was
mischief already in having victuallers' houses and beer
open, why extend the mischief further ? He hmed ti
hon. member would press his amendment to a division.
(Divide.)
Mr. SALOMONS said he should support the amendment.
(Hear, bear.) He felt an important interest in this sub-
ject, which was common to all hon. members, namely, the
Erof expediency. He thought it would be inexpedient,
g the spirit and beer houses opened already on the
Sunday, to extend the right of opening to refreshment
houses. (Divide.)
Lord J. MANNERS (who rose amongst cries of
" Divide ") suggested to the hon. member for Leeds as
amendment in the form of his motion. With regard to its
merits, he would only say that this question of
the due observance of the Sabbath had already per-
plexed Christendom for 1,800 years. He always
extremely regretted the introduction of this sort of discus.
lion into the debates of the house—(bear, hear}—but as the
amendment bad been proposed by the hon. member, he
supposed the house must come to some direct decision upon
it. He would, therefore, on the present occasion confine
himself to the coniparatively narrow issue raised by the her.
member. No one could be more opposed than he (Lord J.
Manners) was to any attempt to diminish the comforta of
the poorer classes by any puritanical or pharisaical legisla-
tion on this subject. But he could not shut his eyes to the
fact that, in the interests of the poor themselves, some
check ought to be placed upon indiscriminate Sun-
day trading. But this whole subject was likely
to be brought before the house shortly. As to
the comparatively short point before the house, he
confessed he did not see that a case had been made out for
the extension of Sunday trading. Hs should therefore vote
for the amendment. _ _ _

Mr. BAINES accepted the suggestion of the noble lord
with regard to the alteration of the amendment.
Mr. VILLIERS wished to remove an apprehension. One
hon. member had said that the house wise about to divide
on a question of observance or non-observance of the Sab-
bath. The noble lord had pat it as a case of the extension
or non-extension of Sunday trading. He would wish the
house clearly to roe the sane before them. They were
nor, be it remembered, going to close the publichaoaea
-
mid beer-houses. They were not going to prevent wine and
'spirits being seat fey to be coemumed in these refreshment
homes ; or to prevent a man from ordering a dozen of wine
Into a refreshment house and drinking it there. Then what
difference was there between the ease of a man who bought
the wine in the shop, or ordered it into the shop frees
elsewhere ? The argument seemed to be this, that because
there were now placed before the people temptations in the
shape of spirit and beer houses, which it was acknowledged
they did not give way to in any immoderate extent, there-
fore they were not to offer them the far is injurious temp-
tation of the refreshment houses. Did not the people act
at present like intelligent beings and good Chris-
tians, without making beasts of themselves, even
although public-houses were open on Sunday ? The
hon. member for North Stafforishire had talked of the
increasing tendency to the desecration of the Sabbath.
Where was that increasing desecration to be met with—
(bear, hear).-how was it shown to exist? (Hear, hear.)
The hon. member's recollection must extend over • longer
period than his (Mr. Villiers's) if he remembered the people
more sober, more frugal, more decent, in their observance
of the Sabbath than they were at present. (Hear, hear.)
, How was this result best effected ? -Why, by offering to the
public some innocent recreation. But there were hon.
members opposite who were ow: wood to evert rocroatioo.
They would stop every steamboat, every steam carriage
on the Sunday, when it was shown that as their use in-
creased, thankenness among the people diminished. He
trusted the house would not be misled to vote on • false
issue.

11;. SPOONER said that hon. gentlemen had so (directly
appealed to him as toeing one of those who wished to de.
prise the poorer classes from having really good and proper
recreation, that he most trouble the home with a few
weeds He challenged the right bon. gentleman to produce
a single instance in which he (Mr. Spooner) had over stirred
an iota to produce such ► result. The subject was a very
Moult one ; but his opinion was the more
they couhi give good and innocent recreation to
the poor, ever. on Sunday, the more they
would lead them to a proper improvement of the
day. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member for
Marylthooe had sensed him (Mr. Spooner) of having taken
that course. But what lie felt was this.. There were a
number of places open on Sunday which he felt to be
h4bly crinntinl places, nod led to a great deal of immo-
rality, and this number it was proposed largely to increase.
If they went into Westminster, Lambeth, and elsewhere on

the Sunday they would have proof enough of the increased
desecration of the Sabbath, for there they would see shops
of all kinds open nearly all day on Sunday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would state
the conclusion, not to which the government had come, but
at which they remained. It appeared that the hon. gentle-
man approached the question frem this point of view—that
all these licensed houses were n • y places of immo-
rality, and that being the case, he naturally thought it
would be better to have them opened six days in the week
only instead of seven. But that was not the view upon
which the house had sanctioned the bill. The view upon
which the house had proceeded was that it was desirable to
allow the people greater facilities for obtaining wholesome
refreshment under conditions which would favour tempe-
rance and sobriety than they had under the existing law.
Up to the present time the law had restrained trading on
certain days, of which the Sundays were the most promi-
nent and important, but which also included Christmas-
days, Good Fridays, and other days appointed for religious
observance. But this amendment overlooked these latter
claws of days, leaving them to be devoted to that intem-
and riot which it was said the opening of then
rorir 'on Sunday would occasion. The act of Charles 11.
excepted public-houses and inns from the prohibition which
applied to other houses to trade on the Sundays. That ex-
emption had been continued by subesquent legislation.
But if this amendment were adopted, these refreshment
houses—ea eating-houses and pastry-cooks—would be placed
in 4 worse position than the mere drinking-shops. He WA
not insensible to the inconvenience of allowing these places
to be open on the Sunday, but upon the whole he thought
it would be still more inconvenient to establish as excep-
tion as against a class of houses in which certainly the evil
would be lee than in the case of the mere drinking-rooms.
He hoped the house would reserve this question of Sunday
trading, and deal with it in reference to all these several
classes of houses alike.

Mr. HENLEY complained that so important an amend-
ment was brought forward without notice, and s
that it should now be withdrawn and brought up onntCred.
port. The question involved was a large one and &difficult
one, and it was not usual to bring forward such a question
without notice, that all who took an interest in it might
be present and tab a part if they chose in the discussion.
No doubt the step they were now taking would render any
further dealing with the subject the more difficult. He re-
gretted that they had departed from the recommendation
of the committee, in having three descriptions of these
houses instead of one, the consequence of which he thought
would be a competition between them which would conduce
to intemperance. He thought there should be the same
law for these different classes of refreshment houses.

Mr. PULLER urged that the refreshment houses would
be on a different footing to beer-houses and public-houses,
inasmuch as they would not be compelled to close during
the time of divine service. (Divide.)
Mr. BAINES had had no intention to take the house by
surprise. He bad been prevented from giving notice,
partly from the hope that the right hon. gentleman opposite
would have brought the resolution forward, and partly from
the numerous notices of amendment which the Chancellor
of the Exchequer himself had given. He did not feel
justified in complying with Mr. Henley's suggeetion.
(Loud cries of "Divide.")
Mr. PACKS, who was interrupted by loud cries for a
division, remarked that in the committee which eat two or
three years ago evidence was adduced that in one district of
London the number of people in the public-houses on Sun-
day evenings outnumbered those who were in the places of
worship.
Mr. MALI'S also spoke, but was so moth interrupted
by the impatient demands for the division, that he all but
failed to make himself heard. He was understood to say
that if the refreshment houses licensed under this bill were
to be closed on the Sunday they ought to shut up the public-
houses on that day also.
The committee then divided on the question that the
word Sunday be inserted :
For the amendment B2
Against

Clause-25 was agreed to.
On clause 28,
Mr. AYRTON suggested that fie refreshment houses
having wine licenses should he dosed during the hours of
divine service se well as the publitilioness and beer-houses.
Mr. Griffith, Mr. Crossley, Mr. James, and Mr. Hardy
supported the same view.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, said the
clause as drawn ran upon all fours with the words of the
Beer Act. The schedule at the end of the bill restricted
them from the sale of refreshments and wine. He had no
objection, therefore, to introduce into the clause these
words : "Nor shall any such holm be open for the sale of
wine or any article whatever." (Hear, hear.)
The clause se amended was agreed to.
On clause 27.

EENTINCK drew attention to the neer:dimity of
baring the provisions in this bill against adulterating wine
very stringent A trade had lately arisen in wines, which
were called South African wince, which were found to be
made in this country, and therefore publicans were com-
pelled to adulterate their porta and sherries in order to meet
the competition created by these adulterated wines. if some
such provision as he suggested was not introduced into the
bill, lie should move an amendment to inflict penalties upon
persons who should knowingly sell, mix, or expose for sale,
any adulterated wines.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
himself prepared an amendment which be thought would
meet the case. The words he proposed to insert were, "or
shall knowingly sell or offer for sale any wine so mixed, di-
luted, or adulterated."
Mr. G. W. BENTINCE (West Norfolk) said it was per-
fectly notorious that from the moment the scheme of the
government became known a system was established in
wire for buying up the worst description of wines and
adulterating them for the English market. He believed
that the poisonous compounds which would be sold
under the name of wine when the bill came
into operation would be far more dangerous to
health than the cheap wines now retailed. He hoped
some restrictive measures would be adopted for preventing
the wholes►le and public poisoning which wouli otherwise
take place, and he was of opinion that the clause should be
made much more stringent than it was at present There
ought to be some regular constituted authority to examine
the compounds likely to be offered for sale under the name
of wine, and to prevent adulteration as far as possible.
Mr. A. STEUART suggested that the amendment should
be, "or shall sell or offer for sale any wine which to the
knowledge of such mesa has been so mixed or adulterated."

Mr. E. JAMES ;minded the house that the wines now
sent to the English market were adulterated before they
left the countries in which they were grown, and stated that
in St. Petersburg alone more champagne was sold than was
ever grown in France.
Mr. AVItTON said be had recommended the licensed vic-
tuallers who had complained to him of the scheme of the
government to indemnify themselves for any injury they
might imstain by watering their gin. (Laughter.) The
Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, was actually going
to make it an offence to sell weak wine. He (Mr. Ayrton)
thought it would be the greatest bleasing to the public to
weaken both wine and spirit ; and under these circum-
stances he hoped the word "dilute would be struck out of
the amendment.
. ---.—..

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
languageof theclause was not simply "chlute,"but "fraudu-
lently dilute." He would not enter into the grave question
whaler wine and water was better than wine, nor did he
desire to interfere with those publicans who wished to sell
wine and water, but what he did object to was that wine
and water should be sold under the name of wine. He
would even go so far as to say that if a man professed to
sell gin he ought to sell gin, and not gin and water. No
person in his real and ardour for the prosecution of virtue
ought to be allowed to defend the eobriety of the
people through the medium of fraud, and to give
en article which was different in fact from that
which it professed to be. He thought the extent to
which the adulteration of wine was carried on in
the metropolis was greatly exaggerated. The committee on
the adulteration of food and drinks inquired into the sub-
ject, and ascertained that in about twelve cases the wines
sold were unadulterated ; in seven or eight other omen they
were adulterated with Cape wines ; and in a very few cases
adulteration bad been carried on by means of very objec-
tionable articles.

Ifr...loll3lfalE observed that where • warranty was
given that the wine was pure, and it was proved to be im-
pure, a remedy could be obtained by simply proving the
warranty, babe thought it would be very di cult to prove
is any awe that the person who sold adulterated wines
"knew" that they were adulterated.
After • short conversation tho amendment proposed by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer was agreed to.
On clause 35, providing for the exemption from the
general operation of the MU to oertain places,
Mr. AYRTON said he was surprised to see the exemption
of Oxford and Cambridge. The theory upon which the bill
was founded was that the consumption of wine would pro-
mote temperance, and therefore if the bill would be good to
the rest of the oommunity, it would necessarily be good for
the youth resorting to tdre universities. But the fact was
the committee did not dare to apply the provisions of this
bill to those places where their own sons were sent to be
educated. (Ob. oh.
The CHANCELLOR of tho EXCHEQUER said the
hoe. and learned gentleman bad made • slight mistake, for
the bill was to be applied to Oxford and Cambridge as well
as to all other places; but In order to retain the jurisdiction
now in existence at the universities, this clause had been
inserted . .

Mr. HARDY said he did not see why the free vintners
of London should be exempted from the operation of the
bill. They ouirht to be obliged to take out licensee'. It
wee a great MIMICS that they should be permitted to open
• shop and allow another person's name to be placed over
the door without being compelled to sake out • license.
Nor did he see why the mayor and burgemee of Bt. Allmon
should be exempted from the operation of the bill, Per-
haps it wee to compensate them for being disfranchised.
Sir G. C. LEWId said the beet thing to do would be to
lean the free vintners to be dealt with in the London Cor-
poration Hall. (Laughter.) That lardy possessed mivileges
in reference to the opening of public-houses which could not
be dealt with on this occasion.
Mr. HARDY said the Vintners' Company could, without
taking out • license, open • place for the sale of wine, end
that ought not to be allowed. He would then-fore move
an amendment to the effect that they be not allowed any
exemption from the operation of this bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that as regarded St. Albans the Mayor and Corporntiou
claimed under an ancient charter to enjoy the licensing
power which was ordinarily lodged in the hands of the

justices, and consequently it was now proposed to exempt
them. Then, as to the free vintners he thought at
proposition of his right hon, friend.. the Home Secretary
should be acceded to. To adopt tiU doeadment of th
hon. member for Leominster (Mr. Hardy) would be grant.
ing too much or too little ; and the effect would be to
leave the law in a state of ambiguity. It would be much
better to deal with the matter substantively by a separate
bill, and he confessed he thought it was a matter which pal.
Bement should deal with.
Mr. W. MARTIN said it would be hardly fair to take
away the privilege without notice to the free vintners.
The committee divided—
For Mr. Hardy's amendment 9O
Against it
The announcement was received with laughter.
After clause iii,
The committee proceeded with the postponed clause,.
Clauses 12 and 12 were negatived.
Oa clause 12, one of the reserved clauses,
Considerable discussion took place on the proposal b.
give the power of granting licenses to the metropolitan
police magistrates. It was urged that this power was given
to the county magistrates in other counties, and there was
no reason why there should be a special excerption in Mid.
dews.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ultimately
said that as the feeling of the house was in favour of the
Middlesex magistrates, he would undertake to alter the
clause to that effect on the report.
The clause was then agreed to, and after some further
debate, the house resumed.
The house went into committee on the Nuisance, Re-
moval and Diseases Prevention Bill, the object of which is
to appoint local authorities in every place, under whose
charge the health of the locality should be placed, but es
the fret clause a motion was made to report progress, and
the house resumed.

The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad.
journed at a quarter after 1 o'clock.

MARKETS.

- -
LONDON WEEKLY DOCK RETURNS.-MAY It

!nipped. iDsUrerd. Pr. Moak 18517
139042—West India caska 2,744 2,900 10,188 9,009
MA61621159.
Bengal and Madras bop tea 4,818 91.571 non
Penang —
Foreign .... ..... ...p 6,118 15,278 104,601 194,969
COYFFM-W.I.
Mocha
Ceylon
C0006.—W.1. bogs 274 448 2,199 8,944
Foreign — 1,003 10,721 5,861
ILIIM—W.I ~.... 867 468 140,606 1 18,861

TALLOW.—The decline in the tallow market made fur.
ther progress het week, particularly on the spot and foe
May and June delivery, and until the prices on the spot are
more equal, either by an advance for Oct. to Dec. or a fur.
they decline on the spot, it is unreeeenable to suppose that
the trade will take, at this time of the year, a cask more
than they require from day to day. From St. Petersbur;
the market is noted quiet, at 47 to 48 re. for August. Er.
change, 353 to , costing about 50s. laid down here. Town
tallow declM Sd. on Friday, and is to be had to-day at
51s. Sd. net cash. The market closes Sat for June, but with
symptoms of firmness for Oct to Dec. ; spot, 525. 9d. ; May
and June, 525., sellers ; July to September, Ms. ; October
to December, 50s. 6d.: 50s. 3d. was taken for this period
in the course of the day ,• Odessa sheep, 53a. to 52a. 6d.
beef, none on offer; South American heldfor 555., the dock
of this kind being very small ; palm 011, 465. ; Cocoa nut oil,
Cochin, 441. 15e. to 451. 10a. ; Ceylon, 435. 6d. ; Sydney,
425. to 435. 6d., lees 21 per cent. discount ; rough fat, 21. 10d.
—(From the circular of Messrs. Smith and Charles, dated
Monday evening.)

COTTON.—Liewarom, MAT 14. —The sales of cotton
to-daeagrevratimated at 8,000 bales. A fair demand, without
any in prices.

CATTLE. —LrricarooL, MAT 14. —The rup ly of cattle
and sheep to-day was unusually small. The demand slow,
at very high prices for each. Numbers at market—Cattle,
799 ; sheep, 4,780.

COALS. - LowDoN, MAT 14.-Bell's Primrose, 13s. ;
Betide West Hartley, 15s. 9d. ; Davison's West
Hartley, 16s. 9d. ; Howard's West Hartley, 15.. 9d.;
Tanfield Moor Butes, 13s. 3d. ; Walker Primrose, 13.. 3d. ;
Wylam, 16s. 6d. ; Walls End Aeon Close, 16s. 9d. ,• Wall.
End Eden, Hs. 9d. • Walls End Marton, 16s. •, Walls End
Hilda, 15s. 6d. ; Eden Main, 17s. ; Wall. End %idylls
Hatton, 17a. 3d.; Walls End Pramwellgate, 16s. 9d. ;
Walls End Haswell, 18s. ; Walla End Bettor, 18s. ;
Walla End Raiser' Hatton, 17s. 3d. ; Walls End South
Hatton, 18s. ; Walls End Haugh Hall, 16s. 9d. ; Walls
End Hamrick, 15s. 6d. ; Walls End Hello., 17s. iitl. ;
Walls End South Hartlepool, 17s. 3d. ; Walls End
South Durham, 17s. ; Walls End South Whitworth,
15s. 6d. ; Walls End Thorpe, 17s. ; Carsay and Duffryn
Malting, 225. 6d. ; Llangenneeb, 21a.-Ships at market, 91;
sold, 56.