The National Register.
London, England, 1822-06-30 00:00:00

-- -
attack, it was impossible for me to sit silent.--(Cheers.)—
With respect to lbe general queatioe, continued the hon. and
learned gentleollm..he would poly say, that widow atiteriitg
into the personal character of Lord Sitlinontli, which the noble
marquis (Londouderry) had so much dwelt upon in his speech,
• more absurd and ridiculous attempt than that of raising hint
to the (Ace of prime stimister of the country, and particularly
at the time he was so raised, had never before been heard of.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that the words—
.' disgusting and disgraceful," were not applied to the general
scope of the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Bennet's) arguments, hut
when he heard that hon. member compare his noble friend to
one of the doorkeepers of that llouse, and when he heard him
add that situations such as he filled had been, from the Revo-
lution downwards, given to great families as the reward of
corruption, he could not but say that such language was dis-
gusting and disgraceful; and however much disposed he was
to retract his words used iu the heat of debate. wkich might
he considered offensive, he could not, under all the circum-
stances retract those express-ons.
Mr: CREE% EY briefly replied, and after disclaiming all
motives of personal hostility to Lord Sidniouth and his family,
proceeded to observe, that as the honorable member for Corte
Castle had moved as an amendment, that the House should
proceed to the other orders of the day, and as his (Mr. Creev) '9
object was to pot his resolutions upon the journals. he should
merely hand up to the Speaker his first resolution. Ile should
then take the sense of the House upon it ; and if it were nega-
tived, be should then move his ether resolutions, and as the
other orders of the day were proposed to be read. Ile did,
not, however, intend to divide the Ilonae upon any of his Tabu-
lutions, except the first.
.

- .
The Ilouse then divided npon Mr. Bank's amendment, when
there appeared—For it, 143—Against it, 42-31njorit) in
favour of the amendment, 101.

On our re-admission into the gallery the other orders of the
dsy were then read ; but, as it was proposed N each of them,
Mr. Creevey proposed one of his resolutions as se) amendiumit.
The amendments, however, were all negatived.
The House then adjourned at a quarter before three o'clock.
THURSDAY, JUNI.. 27.
The House went into a committee on the stamp act, and Mr.
Lushiugton movxd resolutions respecting wheeled carriages.
Mr. Calcraft and Mr. I'. Moore expressed their astonishment
that such a subject should be introduced into a stamp act.
Mr. LOCK HART, adverting to the Stamp Duties Hill, spoke
of the necessity of settling the question about 20s. and 255.
deeds stamps; after the discussion that had taken place m e
doubt about the validity of deeds had arisen that ought to he
set at rest. The clause to advance the duty to 255. was, lie un-
derstood, to be abandoned.

Mr. LISHINGTON admitted that the subject merited con-
sideration. Resolution ag.eed to.
Mr. Alderman VI OOD presented a petition from vn indi.i-
vidurl named Ewer, formerly keeping the King's Arms in
Westminster, complaining of the magistrates hawing arbi-
trarily deprived hint el his licienee. Petition read and ordered
to be printed.
LICENSING SYSTEM.

Mr. G. BENNET mused the third reading of the Alehouse
Licensing Bill.
Lord GRAN BOURNE expressed his disapprobation of some
parts of the bill, and he moved, as an amendment, that the 101 l
be read a third time this day three months.
Aid. C. SMITH said, that the Chairman in the committee had
too readily given way to the opposition urged against the bill.
It was now completely altered. All the penal clauses were
against the poor publicans. The brewers, it seemed, Ind the
preponderating iulluence. The bill in its present form was
worili
. . . . _

Mr. CARTWIRGHT observed, that he bad heard no coin-
plaints respecting magistrates' conduct towards public-houses,
and he therefore declared, that to deprive the magistrates of
their controuling power over public-Louses would be of most
injurious tendency ; lie should therefore support the amendment.
31r, 31ONCK. denied that the bill diminished the powers of
the country magistrates ;it only re;.;ulated them. Those powers
were useful, he knew, as a magistrate. Some of them hail re-
sisted public-Louses from evangelical'. horror of beer drink.
iug ; and others tool it into weir heads that public•houses were
calculated to promote the destruction of their game. He ap-
proved (tithe bill as far as it went ; it was calculated to denee
the unlimited power of the magistrates. In the country many
houses had been arbitrarily and capriciously closed ; so that in
many places persons might travel ten or twelve miles witlio..t
Laing able to purchase the relief derivable front the wholesome
beverage of beer.
Mr. CALCRA FT said he did not think that the country ma-
gistrates deserved to have such a stigma DU( QD them as was
conveyed by this bill. It would take from their coutroul the
publicans in their neighbourhood ; sod if it were not withdrawn,
he must support the amendment.
Mr. (Secretary) PEEL trusted that the clause would be
withdrawn, or considerably modified. Ile could riot consent
to withdraw from the magistrates in the differetit counties,
the coutroul hitherto enjoyed over public houses. He thou,,ht
that power was useful fur public 'lmposes. They were not to
legislate on some cases of hardship. If there were to be ap-
peals against some decisions of magistrates, the consequence
would he, that there would he few or no complaints preferred,
it would lie deemed in Hinny cases not worth the trouble of
making complaints against improper and ill •corlticted houses.
—He hoped the bun. member would withdraw or muddy the
clause in question.
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR did not think the clause in question
called for from any necessity. Ile had attended petty sessions
for thirty•five years, alai lie had never seen one instance where
the licenses were withdrawn on account of publicans baring
pursued party objects—certainly not on account of pinieliers
having been lodged in particular houses. It any licences had
had been withdrawn, it was where the public-houses were
found to be too numeruns. To repeal the lower that at present
existed would be to limit most useful powers in the magistrates.
They would unt then he able to perform most useful duties.
Mr. B. WILBRAHAM spoke against the clause. To retain
it would be to repeal a power that was most usefully lodged
with the local magistrates. He hoped it might be withdrawn,
or that the bill tilsomd be postponed till the next session.
Mr. LOCK lIAR'f said, that while the bill was to give some
security to Ike victuallers, it ought to existed protection to the
public.; that the victuallers should in some way be subject to
the consequeucea of " diluted and adulterated liqimuis
of using bad measures, or of encouraging improper COMillet
in
their houses. Ile believed that the country magistrates had
suocessfully checked the progress of debauchery and drunken-
ness in public houses , but he believed the magistrates had
been nuttily aided by the poverty of the times, amid the vapid
articles sold at MUM country public-Nooses. He, however,
thought that the bill ought to be re-committed,
to ascer-
tain whether the objections could not be removed, and at the
game time wilt titer means of limiting that unniopoly %Web had
givisvii up (mold uu be devised.