Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-09-02 00:00:00

water consumers, The serious first cost of an
entire double set of mains will thus be rendered
quite unnecessary, while the public will be spared
the infliction—no small matter, by the bye—of
having the whole of the pavements throughout
the borough torn up, and the streets rendered
impassable for months together ; while the
works would thus be rendered much less complex
than if a double set of mains ramified throughout
the whole of the borough—a most important
consideration.

When all these matters are duly considered,
we feel convinced that the good sense of the
Council will be an ample guarantee against
any specious attempt to fasten successfully a
plan upon the ratepayers which practical men
declare to be uncalled for, and which involves an
outlay so very considerable.

THE case of Mr. WICKHAM, reported in Mon-
day's NORTHERN TIMES, is one calling for a brief
consideration, particularly from the fact that
an impartial jury have reversed the decision of
the magistrates, and by their verdict stamped
the proceedings of certain police officers as
arbitrary and oppressive upon• a numerous and
most respectable class of our fellow-townsmen.
Mr. WicKirem was charged with wilfully per-
mitting and encouraging drunkenness in his
house on the 2nd of June. It appears that a
similar charge had been preferred against him
for a like offence on two previous occasions, and
in each case there was a conviction, followed by
a fine. Hence Mr. WICKHAM is an object of
special care and solicitude by the police. From
the evidence of Inspector WILSON, it appears
that they watched his house with a vigilance
that-was 'most unusual; and no sooner did they
find a man or woman emerge therefrom than in
they popped, made an examination of the pre-
mises, laid an information, and carried through
their prosecution. The evidence given by the
police-officers, on Saturday, clearly prove that in
cases of the kind they are at all times prepared
to hazard the most random statements on oath.
and give sworn opinions on this and that
character and quality of drink. Their
interference, as elucidated by their testimony
before the . Recorder, shows that the
present surveillance of the public-house keepers
of Liverpool is not only objectionable, but
fraught with serious disadvantages. The accusa-
tion against Mr. WICKHAM was, that he per-
mitted and encouraged drunkenness in his
house. This implied that all the parties in the
house, at the time the police officers entered,
were not only drunk, but that they had become
intoxicated from liquor supplied to them by Mr.
WICKHAM or his assistants.

Now, it requires no argument to demon-
strate that the police could not -prove any such
thing. They merely entered the house at a
certain hour of the morning, and there found
a number of people who had been drinking.
Whether they were drunk or not is a matter of
little moment, for the 'wording of the charge
implied that it was Mr. Wlcratam's liquor that
made them tipsy. Is not the law, as thus
administered, most dangerous ; and may not an
innocent man be made a victim, if it suits the
whims of a police constable to " spot him." and
institute proceedings similar to that which took
plaice on Saturday. We may talk of the uncon-
stitutional character of the Maine Liquor Law,
but the empowering of any class of public
officials to swear against licensed pnblicans, as
Inspector WILSON and his colleagues did on
Saturday, is ten times more objectionable in
principle, and injurious in practice. All who are
engaged in the liquor trade have no security
against the private pique or petty grudge of the
police ; they are liable to be hauled up at any
moment, and by means of exaggeration and
distorted facts, convicted and fined for an offence
of which they are entirely innocent. To carry
out the law as certain magistrates whose princi-
ples are antagonistic to all and ever?' traffic in
spirituous liquors, would be certain ruin to
every licensed victualler in the kingdom, for
no matter how he acted if the police officer has
the will, he possesses the power to flue, and
ultimately confiscate the license. They are a
body too numerous, influential, anal wealthy to
annoy and persecute as was done to Mr.
Wickham.

But there is also another strong objection to
this spy system of the police, we allude to
their impudently snatching up people's glasses
and tasting their contents, for the purpose of
" proving" a case. Accustomed as they are to
give evidence in the Police Court, the Quarter
Sessions, and Assiz?. Courts, their direct evidence
is not easily shaken. Nevertheless, we are of opi-
nion that their ipse dixit is too often taken where
it should be rejected ; besides, the magistrates
should not encourage the practice of " tasting"
glasses. We have already proved that it is
decidedly an illegal act on the part of the police
to lift any person's glass, and taste its contents.
And although it may be very desirable to eradi-
cate the practice of drunkenness, we must not aim
at effecting that object by means which are dis-
reputable, and calculated to lead to a breach of
the peace.

We have known more than one instance where
the police have created a disturbance by lifting
glasses from before men, and sipping their con-
tents. We are glad, for these reasons, that the
jury felt it their duty to acquit Mr. WICKEIAM
of the charge preferred against him, and by that
verdict to show the polic3 and the magistrates
that they did not approve of the manner by
which public-house prosecutions are instituted