The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-18 00:00:00

Mr. HENLEY would not express any opinion upon the
clauses till he saw the hope which it was finally to immune.
On clause 12, line 31,
Mr. E. JAMES moved after the words, " wine license,"
to insert the words, "at their discretion, and upon all or
any of the grounds upon which they are now entitled, to
bie or disallow any licenses by virtue a the acts now in
force respecting the panting of licenses to public-houses."
He said that the &jest of the 'mendicant was to give to
the magi bats the sea control which they now bad over
ordinary "ale-horns," as they were called in law' or pub-
lic-boner. The Chaneellor of the Exchequer now proposed
togivenmegietratesthe right of " objec to the grant of
lbws,., and he limited this powerto two =s. Bathe (Mr.
James) woad ask who wee to pot the ob ' power of the
reepstrates in Lee! Weretaryto do so propriongore, or by
what other enemas I If the impetrate. were to have any
parr a all, and the hoo. gentleman admitted they were to
have power of objeclft, whyshould they not posers the
power they Dow had of refusing and disallowing lioenses? If
they were not to have this power, it would be better to abolish
their control altogether. The anomaly to which this new law
would lead was a perfectly ridicialas one. They would
have • public-hero,. with a beershop license, • wine license,
mad • refreshanset house license exertion under this bill.
In what reaper would this differ from the ordi-
nary public-boas! It was necessary at present that
the suer license and the magistrate's license should
osexist, and the latter could not be granted without
the former. At present the magistrates had the power of
deciding whether the requirements of a neighbourhood were
much ne to pennit v( a license being ranted. The right
hon. gentleman had made a concession in favour of the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and permitted to the
authorities there the right of deciding upon the require-
ments of • neighbourhood, oa the ground of there being a
number of young men under their control. But beads. the
pester number of young men connected with the IJui-
vanity of London, was there not the whole youth of
the metropolis to be considered! In every street
there would be one of these refreshment houses with
the beer and wine license rivalling the public-house. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred to the case in
which • lissom had been recently refused to • man named
Lagar. Well, under the new act • man who bed his
liana refused would have nothing to do but to take out •
refreihment-house laces next door, with • beer and wine
license, and laugh at the magistrates. The hon. member
maxa
for Westminster, who seemed to be anopponent of the
public.hoice keepers—perhaps because were oppo-
nents of his—was opposed to this " power.
But, as the honourable member for Norfolk said, it
was quite ridiculous to suppose that people would papa.
claret and chablis in these new wine shops. The Oben.'
cellor of the Exchequer said he would gladly exchange the
dmikenneas of London for the drunkenness of Paris ; bat
everyone who knew anything of Paris knew that a cheap
liquor of the strongest kind was commonly sold in the sir-
mineta at Parts. But he did not put the question on this
ground ; he thought • power should be reserved to the mo-
or that it should be abolished al r.
The CHANCELLOR of the PICHEQUEE ihsaid he could
Dot anent to the motion of the hon. and gentleman,
or to the manner in which he bad made it. The ism which
he had very fairly raised way directly opposed to the
vital principle decided on the second reading of the bill.
The hon. and learned gentleman had spoken of the hon.
member for Westminster (Sir J. Shelley) being an oppo-
nent to the publicans, perhaps because they were opponents
of his. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would ask,
was the converse the case! (Much laughter.) The
hon. and learned gentleman had cited the example
of the Univereitiee of Oxford and Cambridge, but
in those cases there were vested rights secured
by ancient charters, from which those corporate bodies
derived considerable revenues, and he was sure the house
would not destroy these beneficial interests by a bye-
blow. The whole question raised by the hon. and learned
gentleman was involved in the three opening words of the
amendment "at their discretion," and it was the question of
this discretion that was disposed of on the second reading of the
hill. The hon. and learned gentleman had laid, let us have one
=Wor the other ; let us not have • modification. But
as precisely what the house had decided. The
bones had passed a law by which wine would reach clams
of the people who were previously debarred from its use,
and the question was, whether the necessary facilities for
its ceesumptioo by those dames should not be afforded.
That question the hour had decided in the afiirmative, and
to adopt the hoe. and learned member's amendment would
hustrote the object the house had in view, and also the
object et the clause.
Mr. HARDY would vote for the amendment of the hoe.
and leaned member for Ilszykaboae, for the more reason
that he had voted against the sexed Naas of the bill.
Sir J. SHELLEY observed the pair would Cave peat
advantap from these refreshment hates ; be he under-
deed, has hon. and learned friend proposed to place all
such houses under the control of the magistrates—that they
were to decide how many were to be allowed is soy dis-
trict. He could not see how • magistrate was to judge
whether • refreshment or beer house was required in any
cuticular district, and speaking as • megarate, be en-
tirely objected to leaving any discretion with the bugle_
tats whatever. (A laugh.) He wished to see the metro-
polis left to itself in repaid to this !Mstiis (4.0.*
without the interference of the magistrates d the
tura parts of the county of Middlesex, who know
nothing of the rauirements of the town.
Mr. K. SEYMER said that the effect of adopting the
amendment of the hon. and learned member would he to
mar • new class of vested interests, of which there are
too ma), shady.
Mr W. JOLLIFTE maid the clause wee one of the most
objectionable he ever heard of. They were giving the
almost an irresponsible power. He thought it
Zl*lnoiest be left to the magistrates to decide how many of
these houses should be Lensed in a particular district.
Mr. AYRTON objected to giving this complicated
discretion to the magistracy. Ale-houses had been sub-
jected
to the ',mend law from the most ancient times,
and he believed the facts of modern times showed that such
houses ought rather to be subjected to further restrictions
than allowed unlimited freedom of sale. He blamed the
conduct of the government for removing those restraints
whisk tended to promote temperance.
Mr. 1110THERON-ESTCOURT said there were now two
modes of panting licenses, bet that led to no confusion, 1
bemuse they did not interfere with each other. The 1
pas eat clause attempted to amalgamate the two, which he
believed would only lead to confusion. He should like to
see the clause withdrawn. (Hear.)
Sir W. MILES said they appeared to be in a tradition
nate. (Laughter.) It appeared there were to be three
scrims of licensing no*. He thought that persons oujght
to be allowed to take • moderate menace of wine.
(Much Lsughter.) Well, it might be an immoderate
quantity. (laughter.) That would depend on the ash of
the persons who frequented these honer (laughter.) He
hoped therefore they would go to a division on this clause,
all the Mende of the bill or as he 116•10/04. (Hear, hear.)
The committee divided, when the numbers were :
For the amendment ll7
Against
The amendment was accordingly negatived.
Mr. W. HUNT peopled an amendment to the effect that
no license should bsgranted to • person who had been con-
victed of any offence within three years.
Mr. ROEBUCK thought the term " any offence " far too
wide.

PULLER suggeeted that the disqualification should
be • conviction for felony, for any offence punishable by
transportation or penal servitude, or for keeping a disor-
rly
de house.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the words " punishable by imprisonment with bard labour"
would meet the case. - _ - .

Mr: HUNT said he would extend his amendment,
so that the disqualification should apply to the wise of per.
sons convicted of any offences punishable by imprisonment,
omitting the words " with hard labour."
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL suggested that the words
should be "a misdemeanour punishable by fine or impri.
mommot."
Yr. E. JAMES observed that it was a misdemeanour
punishable by fine or imprisonment for a person to sleep in
the orunaair when he had no house to be in. Wes that to
he • l • %Mention that was to last three years?
P COCKE said a subscriber to the fond for Geri-
bade' expedition would be punishable by fine or imprison.
inept, and if the Solicitor-Geneses suggestion were adopted
he would be unable to keep a piablichouse for three years.
After some discussion the amendment was agreed to.
_ .

Mr. Alderman fiALOMONS moved an amendment to the
sifeet that the justices might Si a small fee, not ex-
ceeding 'h. fsl., tote paid to clerks of magistrates.
The amendment was opposed by Mr. NORRIS and Mr.
Howse. . . .

BOUVERIE thought the boo. member for Green-
wich ought to hays given notice of the amendment, but as
he had 00S doss so it ought to be postponed.
The amendment was withdrawn.
. . .

The question thatdieCle;sea;amcnded do stand part of
the bill was thee put.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE rose to state his great objection to
the clause altogether, the po ver given to the magistrates
being too and there being no appeal from their deci-
sion. He Wined th►t if the clause were expunged the
bill would be a much better measure.
The clams as amended was then agreed to.
Clause 13. . .

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated that
he bad insetted in the clause a provisi an giving a power of
wpm', provided three months notice were given previous
to the expiration of the license.
The smendment was then adopted. mud the clause was
aimed to.
Clams 31 as amended was agreed to.
Mr. W. MARTIN moved the Msertion of the following
claues:—" That from and after the passing of this act there
shall be repealed the 12th clause of an act passed in the
24th year of the reign of his la a Majesty King George 111.,
chapter 40, and commonly cal'ed the Tippling Act. The
act in question had been habitually pleaded by persons who
had no tight to shelter themselves under it.
Mr. HARDY trusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would not listen to the insertion of this clause. It bad been
cue of the most useful acts ever
The CHANCELLOR of the CHEQUER objected to
the amendment, which be contended was not germane to the
subject of the bill.
The amendment was then negatived.
Mr. JOHN LOCKE then moved the addition of the fol-
lowing clause :—" That from and after the pouring of this
act, section 7 of the statute of the sth and 6th years of
Wm. IV., chap. 39, shall be and the same la hereby Pt.
pealed." The bon. member Mated that his object woe to
prevent the gals of intoxicating liquors in theatres, =lees a