The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-06 00:00:00

THE MILITIA.

The head-quarters of the Cardiganshire Militia are to
be at Aberystwyth, where the stores will remain as at
present. The Secretary of War has decided that the
selection of a site rests with the colonel and lord-lieu-
tenant of the county, and that the magistrates have not
anything to do beyond voting the necessary grant for
the building.
The. Cumberland militia have received orders to be
ready for embarkation for Dublin on Tuesday. They
will probably sail from Whitehaven.

COMMITTEE ON THE SALE OF BEER

OY SUNDAYS.

Yesterday this committee met for the first time,
shortly after 12 o'clock, to inquire into the practical
working of the Sunday Beer Bill. The members were—
Hon. Grantley Berkeley, chairman ; Major Baring, Mr.
Cheetham, Sir W. Clay, Mr. Cobbett, Sir W. Jolliffe,
Mr. Massey, Mr. P. O'Brien, Sir J. Pakington, Mr.
Scholefield, Mr. Ker Seymer, Lord Harry Vane, and the
Hon. C. P. Villiers.

There was a considerable attendance of the public and
of the body of Licensed Victuallers.
Mr. Hall, the chief magistrate at Bow-street,
fideet,wsthe
first witness examined. He deposed that no case bad
asco to w
come before
was
rehiminutnenddeed
under the t
aiclte, in his o
official capacity,
tra-
veller," but he had given attention to the decisions of
other magistrates. He thought a man ought not to be
considered a bona fide traveller who, merely for health
or recreation, or to relieve his mind in quest of pleasure
or fresh air, went out to Hampstead, Highgate, or
Greenwich. He thought it should be shown that there
was something approaching to an absolute necessity for
travelling, something to call him out urgently,andht,
he
did not think that the Legislature conteumpolnatietd. thlencoansee
of a person who went out merely for pleasure, and
placed himself on a steam-boat to go down to Greenwich.
If such a wide construction was put upon the act they
would never be able to give it effect. He would not,
however, put too limited a construction upon
case that had come under his consideration he found
that one had decided that no person was a " bona fide
traveller " unless he was travelling on business, while
others bad put so wide a construction on it as to make
the act perfectly inoperative and nugatory. Be (Mr.
Hall) would draw a distinction between the traveller on
business. He thought that a person who was ordered
to leave London for Dover for the benefit of his health,
might be looked on in the light of a traveller, and in the
light of a case of necessity, and in passing through he
thought that any publican was bound to receive him as a
traveller and give him refreshment. As most of the
magistrates put • a large and liberal construction on the
act did not consider that the public suffered any in-
convenience, and there were one or two magistrates who
held that business alone should be the excuse.

The Chairman—Then, in your opinion, an act of Par-
liament that gives rise to such conflicting opinions can-
not be a good act of Parliament t
Mr. Hall—Precisely. It becomes almost inoperative.
The Chairman—Do you not consider that some alter-
ation
in the act is necessary, which gave rise to such a
lawyers, and
contrarietymagis-
trates ef th
eo f opinions
metropolis, a
whoon g
werethe stipendiary
good
which gave an opportunity to those who were not law-
yers throughout the country to turn and twist it accord-
ing to their own opinions I
• • Mr. Hall—Yes ; I think ad alteration m it would be
beneficial to the public, and I think it would be desira-
ble to have the terms of it better defined, so as to arrive
at something like a uniformity of decision.
The Chairman—Do you consider that drunkenness on
Sunday since the passing of the act has been checked ?
Mr. Hall—l think it has. There are fewer charges
on Monday at Bow-street than before the act came into
operation. From the returns made. from oharge-sheets
at Bow-street, it appeared that from March 20, 1854, to
Ju1y,1854, the total charges on 31 onday mornings amount-
ed to 604, of which 381 were for being drunk and dis-
orderly. From March 19, 1855, to July 3, 1855, there
were 444 cases on Monday mornings, of which 339 were
cases of drunkenness. He was strongly of opinion, and
could see no other reason for this, than that it was attri-
butable to the operation of the act, that a check was
given to the number of cases that were brought before
him. He had not included in his calculation the cir-
cumstances of the country since the operation of the act,
being under an increase in the price of 'provisions and
taxation, and the pressure of war, such as did not exist
in the year 1854 ; but he did not think those considera-
tions made much difference. ne did not, however,
think that, comparing the 11 months before the act
passed and the period that had expired since, drunken-
ness had diminished ; for, although there were fewer
cases of drunkenness on Mondays, yet there were more
drunken cases on Tuesdays and Wednesdays than there
used formerly to be. The number of men who had been
taken away in the army might have had something to do
with this diminution, but in Bow-street he did not think
it had much to do with it. _

The Chairman—ls it not a hardship on the working
classes to debar them on the only day they have for
health and recreation from the means of obtaining -re-
freshment ?

Mr. .11a11—It is known that they take refreshment
with them. I do not think the working classes suffer
so much in that respect as the wealthier classes, such as
shopkeepers, who go out to enjoy thomaelveo on that

day. I would do away with all distinctions between I
classes ; but if persons choose to go for short distances
out of town on Sundays, they could arrange the period
of their departure and return to meet the requirements
of the act.
The Chairman—Do you think the working classes
should be compelled on the day of recreation and rest to
carry knapsacks on their backs, like soldiers, or a heavy
basket with two or three bottles, besides the child t
Mr. Hall—lt would be better, I thiuk, that they
should suffer sums inconvenience than that the evil
which arises from keeping public-houses open all day
should exist. In his (Mr.; Hall's) opinion it would
be mischievous to open the houses again from 10 to 12
on Sundays to the number of excursionists who came
into London by railway after 10 on that day, such as
shop boys and young women, who were tempted into in-
toxication, He did not know that the people, as the
result of the Sunday bill, resorted to drink in brothels,
but he was aware that liquors were sold at coffee-shops,
and at what were called " the three-halfpenny beer-
shops."
By Sir J. Pakington—He would say that the man
who took the boat, or 'bus, or train, to see the chesnuts
in bloom at Hampton Court was not, but that the man
who went to the same place on a mission of death, was a
bona fide traveller ; but it would be extremely difficult
for either the public or the police to distinguish between
the two. A number of the persons brought to Bow-
street, for drunkenness on Sunday, were excursionists.
He did not think that a man going out of town on plea-
sure, and returning the same day, was a bona fide tra-
veller within the meaning of the act, and lie did not see
how.a traveller was to be defined either by time or dis-
twice. He was at a loss to know whether the onus of
proof would rest upon the publican or the police.
By Sir W. Jolliffe—lt would be better to leave out
the words " bona fide traveller" from the act altogether
in consequence of the contrariety of opinion that had
arisen on the question. He would expunge the words
and rely on the limitation of the hours. As a metropo-
litan magistrate of very considerable experience, he saw
no necessity, but, on the contrary, thought it would be
very injurious, to extend the hours of opening on Sunday
beyond what they were at present. He did not think
that if a man went to Richmond within the prohibited
hours on Sundays, and put up his family at a hotel, be
would be entitled to refreshments at any time of the day.
The poorer classes felt it as a grievance that public-
houses were closed against them while hotels were open
to the wealthier classes. The closing public-houses at ten
o'clock had diminished drunkenness, and he did not
think there had been any complaints in London as to
closing at that hour. He should from his experience be
glad to see public-houses closed every night at twelve
o'clock. He did not think any phrase could be devised
that could accurately define a bona fide traveller. He
would give to magistrates a large discretion, and he
thought the justices of the peace might be safely
trusted. At Hampstead there was a well-known inn,
called Jack Straw's Castle, and on one Sunday afternoon
three persons arrived within the prohibited hours : one
by a brougham, another in an omnibus, and a third
walked—and the magistrate held that they were all tra-
vellers. Another magistrate had held that a man walk-
ing from Mile-end to Hyde-park was a traveller, while
another magistrate held it was necessary for a man to go
out of town to constitute him a traveller. If he (Mr.
Hall) were asked by the Home-office to draw out a
clause defining what a bona fide traveller was, he should
find great difficulty in doing it. It was a matter of con-
jecture now how magistrates would decide, but by strik-
ing out the words bona fide traveller, and relying on the
specified time, the act was intelligible to all the world.
Drunkenness, in his opinion, increased on Tuesdays and
Wednesdays, because unable to get drink on Sundays
men drank heavily on Mondays, and ho thought that
the weekly average of drunkenness was as great as before
the passing of the act.
By Hon. C. P. Villiers—Was of opinion that drunk-
, enness had materially diminished since the closing of
drunk-
; public-houses at ten o'clock on Sundays. He did
not think the word " wayfarer," or "sojourner," was
more explicit than that of bona fide traveller. The use
of the word traveller was no -novelty in acts of Parlia-
ment regulating public-houses, but travellers had always
been a " puzzling" word, though it had always been the
term used in defining a person in search of refreshment.
The best way to meet the difficulty was to close public-
houses altogether within certain hours against all corners.
Since ho had been a magistrate, in 1839, public-houses
had been closed from three to five, and ho had never
heard of any inconvenience occasioned by it.
By Mr. Cobbett—The alteration with reference to the
word traveller took place in consequence of an inn-
keeper refusing to take in a person who called him-
self a traveller, and he had learned that Mr. Justice
Coleridge decided that an innkeeper had no right
either to ask a man his name or where he came
from when he knocked at his door daring the pro-
hibited hours. He thought the burthen of proof as
to being a traveller should be thrown upon the party
cited, the licensed victualler. He was of opinion that
persons going out of town to a christening or a burial
might be looked on in the light of travellers. If a person
falsely represented himself to be a traveller, and gave a
wrong name and address, if he found the publican was
honestly impressed with the notion that the person was
a traveller, he should not fine him. He did not think
that the fact of these informations being in the hands of
the police rendered them obnoxious to the public or the
publicans, as they had at the present time to report on
public-housei generally. He was not at all hostile to any
relaxation of the 'law, but thought it highly desirable
that a proper construction should he given to it. He
had no desire whatever to restrict the comforts of the
people. It was an obnoxious thing for a policeman to
lay an information against a publican for entertaining a
brother and sister • but it was no snore hardship than
for a police constable to have the power of entering a
publican's house ; though if there were no such restric-
tion as existed a publican might have a great many
brothers and sisters.

Mr. Corrie, magistrate of Clerkenwell, deposed that
he and his colleague differed from the views taken by
Mr. Hall, and did not, like that hon, gentleman, limit
the application of the term bona fide traveller. He should
be making himself more a legislator than a magistrate if
he did so, and was inclined to consider the person who
went any distance on pleasure as much a bona fide tra-
veller as the one who went on business. He thought '
that excursionists ought to have the opportunity of get-
ting refreshments after 10, on their return to London.
There had been an improvement in the decrease of
drunkenness. He differed in opinion also from Mr.
Hall with regard to the duty of a publican to prove
that his customer was a traveller, and held that
the party who complained should he compelled to prove
the whole case. He found but a very little di-
minution of drunkenness in his district ; and it
might be that the early closing of public houses bad
driven drunkenness into other quarters. He differed
from Mr. Hall with regard to the definition of the word
traveller. He looked upon persons going by excursion
trains in the light of travellers. A man, going down to
Brighton on Sundays would, in his estimation, be a tra-
veller ; and he thought that persons so returning to town
after 10 o'clock ought to have the means of getting re-
freshment. He thought there had been a slight decrease
in drunkenness since the passing of the act, but he did
not know that the effect of the act had been to cause
great annoyance. He differed from Mr. Hall with re-
gard to the legal construction to be put on the words
bona fide traveller, and also with reference to onus pro.
bandi resting with the publican or police. The act he
thought was first a general limitation of the rights of the
public, and then the impositiott of a penalty. He did not
see the necessity of proof coming from the informer
altogether, but that much would depend on the state-
ment of the traveller. Any increase in charges for drunk-
enness might arise from increase in population. In his
opinion 19-20ths of crime in this country arose from
drunkenness. While conflicting opinions lasted on this
subject the public would no doubt suffer. He (Mr.
Corrie) would put a liberal interpretation on the words
of the act, and thought that any person quitting home in
any way was to be entitled to be considered a traveller,
and be entitled to be entertained at a public-house wher-
ever he went, whether 100 yards fromlis own house, or
to Brighton, Kensington, or Mile-end.
The Chairman—Here we have the opinion of two emi-
nent magistrates—one holding that nobody is a traveller,
and the other that everybody is a traveller; and do you
not think that the Legislature ought to interfere to de-
cide, for the sake of the public, who really is a bona
fide traveller and who is not ? (Laughter.)
Mr. Corrie—Well, if they can. (Laughter.)
The Chairman—And, in the meantime, the unfortu-
nate public are to be pulled both ways, and a man over-
taken in a thunderstorm is to be refused shelter and re-
freshment.

Mr. Corrie thought the conflicting decisions that had
taken place had been productive of inconvenience to the
public. He thought there should be an appeal clause
inserted in the act, so as to enable them to get the deci-
sion of the judges of the Court of Queen's Bench. A
man proceeding any distance, he thought, was entitled
to be considered and served as a traveller—he would not
say whether one mile or five ; and a man going from
Mile-end to Kensington and back again would be a tra-
veller, and ought to be served. Ho did not concur with
Mr. Hall that, to get rid of the difficulty, public-houses
should be closed against all corners within certain hours.
It would be a very easy way of settling the matter, but
the public would not like it. Closing them, he should
say, between 5 and G oclock on Sundays was a great in-
convenience, as that was just the time when persons
going out of town required refreshment. The popula-
tion of Clerkenwell had greatly increased of late years,
but crime and drunkenness had not in proportion. It
would, be a great convenience to the public if public-
houses were only closed between 3 and 5 o'clock on
Sundays, and if it were decided that excursionists and
those going from one end of London to the other were
travellers. The magistrates in cases of drunkenness
could only "discharge," and he did not think that the
police were justified in dragging people through the
streets, and in bringing ordinary cases of drunkenness
before them. A night in the lock-up was enough. No
doubt drunkenness was increased by the temptation of
houses being opened. Everything at present rested on
the interpretation to be given to the term "bona,fide
traveller."
Mr. Arnold, magistrate of Westminster Police Court,
was next examined, and said it was altogether difficult
to define what was and what VW WA a lionci ,fifa travel'

ler. Under the present law, if a man went to Brighton
and hack he was afraid he could not be called a traveller,
and that a publican serving him would be liable to a
penalty, though it was a hardship on the public, for
whose benefit, socially and morally, these restrictions
should be removed. He did not find any diminution
of drunkenness in his district, and he thought the pre-
sent law was not equitable, but objectionable. The law
as it stood scarcely touched the drunkard, but affected
the sober portion of the community. He thought the
onus of proof should be on the publican, though that
was open to doubt. If a party on a wet day, and
through muddy roads, went to a christening, he could
not legally call them travellers, though he should be
strongly inclined to except them, and no man under the
act was a traveller, who went out for fresh air and re-
creation, intending to return the same day.; but at the
same time he thought that, socially and morally, pro-
hibitions in the way of persons obtaining refreshments
were inexpedient and impolitic. He saw so much misery
and mischief produced by drunkenness among the poorer
classes that it was of the greatest importance to stay
the evil, and when it became a habit among the poorer
classes, particularly among women, they stopped short
of nothing to indulge in it. He thought that " clandes-
tine drinking" was indulged in to a considerable extent
in unlicensed houses since the new act had been passed,
and this was open to greater objection than drinking in
licensed public-houses, as policemen could not enter,
whereas, on the other hand, there was a penalty conse-
quent on refusing the admission of policemen into pub-
lic-houses.

The Chairman—Do you think, as the question stands,
you could do anything like justice to the country by
the continuance of the present law t
11 Xiiigii-LThat is a very wide question-31augh:
ter)—but I think that closing at ten o'clock on Sundays
is too early. People could get ginger beer after that
hour, but not porter.
The committee here adjourned to Tuesday next.