The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-19 00:00:00

IHPERIAL PARLIA.MENT-

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 18.
' (Continued fiom our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
PU 3:AC-HOUSES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Ur. F. MACKENZIE proposed the second reading
07 ;his Bill.
Mr. HUME said he was very sorry that the Hon.
Member had not withdrawn the Bill, because it
was not called for by any petitions which
had been presented to the House. He objected to the
measure on the principle that the limitation of public-
houses would not have the desired result of putting a
atop to those drinking habits which he was sorry
to say had become very common in Scotland of
late years. He was as . anxious as any one to re-
medy the evil, but that could not he done by
limiting the number of public-houses. A meeting of
Scotch Members was held yesterday, to consider the
Bill. Twenty-eight Members attended, and not one of
them entirely approved of its principle, the Hon. Mem-
ber (Mr. F. Mackenzie) himself only giving his
assent to one of the clauses. They, however, all
agreed that a committee should be appointed
to inquire into the subject in a full and impartial man-
ner, and with the view of devising some more effectual
means of abating the crying evil. He was bound to say,
however, that a division took place, and that 12 voted in
favour of proceeding with the second reading, and 16
for its rejection, but the whole of the 12 had individually
objections to most of the clauses. Steps had already
been taken in Edinburgh to diminish the number of
public-houses, and whilst in 1830 there were 872, the
number had been reduced to 516 in 1851; but there had
been no commensurate benefit, for the vice had increased
instead of being diminished. The inference he drew
from the fact was that the same liberal policy which had
been so successfully adopted in London, where drunken—
ness had greatly decreased, should be pursued in Scot-
land. It was seldom one saw such large numbers of
drunken persons in the thoroughfares of the metro-
polis as filled the streets of Edinburgh and Glasgow.
In London the monopoly in the sale of beer
had been removed, and places of amusement had been
opened where the labouring classes could spend their
leisure time; and so great a change had taken
pace in the morals of the people, . that whilst
41,000 persons were charged with ' drunkenness
in 1831, only 23,600 were brought before the-
police magistrates on a similar charge during
the past year, though the population had increased from
1,500,000 to 2,ooo,ooo.—(ffeer, hear.) The working
classes, instead of resorting to public-houses, now em-
ployei their ieisure time in visiting the British Museum
and the National Gallery, and in taking a jaunt to Hamp-
ton Court. He should move that- the Bill. be read-
s second time this day six mOnths, btit would Suggest
that a Committee should be appoLted to inquire into the
best means of improving the morals of the people both
in'Scotland and England.—(Hear.)

The emereintent having been put,
:Lord DRUMLANRIG said, though not agreeing with
the whole of the Bill, he thought it would be better
tor go into Committee, when an opportunity would be
given for discussing the whole of its details. He bore
testimony to the demoralizing tendency which the great
cousumption of spirits had upon the people of Scotland,
and to the urgent necessity which existed for some legis-
lative enactment upon the subject.
Mr. A. HASTIE supported the amendment, but de-
nied that the drinking habits of the Scotch people were
on the increase; on the contrary, he contended that the
consumption of spirits had largely diminished. He
approved of the suggestion of the Hon. Member for
Montrose, that a Committee should be appointed, and
he would give it his cordial support.
•Mr. F. MdULE considered that the propositions
made on each side of the House did not differ very ma-
terially. There were many points on which he differed
from the Hoe. Member for Montrose, but he was sure
that the objects of ell parties would be attained by send-
ing the Bill to a Committee upstairs. It was, he con-
fessed, with great pain he had arrived at the conclusion
that the sad 'vice of drunkenness was very prevalent in
Sthotland. He was not one to Bey' anything derogatory
of- his country; but ha could not conceal from himself
the leinentable feet thet in. a popualition of three
millions there .wasa ceneumptien of, ras spirits
to. -the-..amount- of -about six millions of gallons.—
(Hear, hear.) Taking . the. whole- of she population,
frenn the man who wls tottering on the verge of the
grave down to the infant whe an hour ag'o first saw the
light, that gave an average consumption- of spirits
for each individual of two gallons per, •annum ,—(Hear,
hear.) In Glasgow there wa,e a public-house for every
.164 of the population, including in that number both
young and old. This was as monstrous a state of
things as could exist in any city or any country. The
Hon. Member for Montrose said if
,beer licenses were
more generally given in Scotland the evil of drunken-
ness would be considerably diminished; but he doubted
whether that was a correct assumption. What he (Mr.
F. Mettle) objected to was the system existing in Scot-
land of allowing bakers' and grocers' shops to have
lieenoes for the sale of ardent spirits. That system
had a double effect. First, it injured the fair
trader, because, whilst an honest baker for instance
sold good bread at the market price, there was another
baker inethe same neighbourhood who offered his bread
sea pride which was not profitable, and then made up
the deficiency by selling drama to his customers.—
(Hear, hear.) That it was which demoralised
his countrymen , and countrywomen, and which he
wished to see abolished.—(Hear.) It was at these shops
that the servant girl first learnt the taste of whisky, and
the youths of the country were demoralised; and he
would rather see in Edinburgh and Glasgow London gin
palaces established: at the korner of streets, than
that servant girls and youths should obtain
whisky in a surreptitious way.—(Hear, hear.) If they
went into such public places they would do so openly,
and if no shame existed a brand of infamy would in
Many cases be stamped upon them, but now they ob-
tained whisky in grocers' shops in a secret and surrep-
titious manner—the habit of- drinking grew up
from ' time to time, vice - followed vice, mad
at last they became irretrievably ruined. The
increase of beer shops would never make the con-
sumption of beer supersede that of spirits in Scotland.
The object of a Committee ought to be to bring the con-
sumption of spirits under more ' control, and if that
could not he done then to make it more public,
so that public opinion could more effectually bear.
upon the matter. The Hoceurable Member for
Montrose had also adverted to the advantages of
having public institutions for the resort and amusement
of the people; and if he would be lets niggardly with
regard to the public purse, he would be most happy to
adopt his suggestions with regard to Scotland, but it was
clear they could not be carried out except at the ex-
pense of the country. He hoped the House would as-
sent to the second reading ttialhfien refer the subject to
a.Cemmittee, to' be appointed for the purpose.
Mr. OSWALD admitted the consumption - of spirits
in Scotland was great, acid ought to be diminished, but
considering that no legislative measure would diminish
the cgs:ism:option, he should sopp9.rt the'anendment. The
Bill was a piece of the purest humbug he had ever seen
iletroducsd into the. House. Ise regretted very much the
round which, the Government had taken, because he
rlit,ght it was of the greatest importance -that a
of eueli a nature should, ;be brought in by
the 'Git'veinumnt•and not by an independent Member.
jethoey wanted en inquiry on the subject, let them have
ruitteet but he would not have them read this Bill
a second time, which he believed would be most ruischle-
VOUS to the country,Mr MAGREGOR was sorry to have seen any mem-
...befLefvtehre
might supporting a' Bill of this nature.
33-riiiiwouldb"e"oYt be of
tt:ltkr I'4, he was convinced that this
the slightest use. Legislation would
not effect ene.thieg. het only way to improve the so-
briety of' the peep',
of Scotland was by education, be-
ginning et tieearliest age. To limit the number of
public-houies would be to offer a -premium f. r the pur-
chase of larger,guantities of spirits. The
ob-
noxious to the wheal *ak _ Bill was v ee ralatid and he should
hMr. daT4 do
-yiitl9.(rG7Pß°RseUiCt. Eiqiatelt:aitistbasvg,iee'en.12e1 i.
ah pretty well
whgthrheawteerieU:he
ettablisited-fuel that drunkenness
in counteracting. the benefits of etiolation
widely (Vex:-
1 Seetiand. seee u
ees '-
, hie. to the latest. re-
turns the pwoortion of euucateeata t
uneducated criminals
in S:olden& veal as 4 :0 1. Theatre! Gel:alma, the
had t p
Member for if said that tee number ot,hliessziets
had dimirrighhalt trot the consumption
in that, city e,rai thirty-six battles per head of the whole
Populition-, -Man, woman, and him", " 311166%2d teen
called the) mother-milk of Welig 1.w.: Sheriff Melon's
testimony was to the effect Jat two-thirds hat the
',
crimes in that city.. was caused b:r the use of and nt
EPHhi: Wee khey, thee, w- be teld that deetch
geutlemennett, sit down eonriv, with Pli4 evil With-
cu' ,sq-!,(11-, nit , ameliorate it? If the .argument
of th Rers. Member for Glesgews thtt legislation .never
did any ,euteten these *tatters Wll3 c:ore,or., what was to
bee sreeief all the BUN that had
bin brought into that
House by- the Barleif SbitftP6ntiry to.
im rive h?
ties' i the working classes? He best
rhougiethet( '
Cerc utidrsie-
to pursue-would-be to lead thig Bat 4 time, arid
send it upstairs to a Committee -with power to take
evieence co lb' subject..., ,„
Mr. COWAN a'id' that 'nerepresented a constituency,
*trump - which ho was ashamedconfsss that there
existeda graat misery and PatiParitm, sod he
gladly support any measure se bleat be thought would
tend to: alleviate at. He did not think that the Bill
would have thit effect. 4 d(d-not touch the great evil
—the wreteheet state of the dwellings of the poor,
Which
drove the people so despair, and lea them to' seek relief
and ceneolatien in ardent spirits. .
Sir J, HOPE approved o: the general principle of the
1210°_, Anti would Ruppert the sesoe4 reading of it.
The LORD ADVOCATE said he intended to sup-
port Iheaecend reeding Whatever might the Bide
said there cotdd not be the sligaesst doubt that ietemper-
sta tvit% eryiog anti scendelooe in Scotland,_.
40 Iledid net wonder It ell et the returee which
had been quoted from the evidence of Sheriff Alison,
and no mats who was at all connect,d wir hh e chininal
afftirs ef that country could ''oil t^ see that, if they
could diminish she
mount of huethey
mperance would
also be diminishing carne.-L.
the amount of en near,
hear.) It 'was to
hive a tendency thisobtain r" measure which would
that he meant to vote
for the second reading wa-
,t
garded the Bill itself, he could
this Bill, hut as re-
e could say at once that he
could not support h.-_(Hear, hear.) The subject with
which it dealt was very important,
sent to a Committee some adcii and if the 11111 were
thrown upon the subjset anda better tionel light might be
this means they woold be moreliiceißill devised. By
than if they appointed a genera' theyCOneYesto;s°tehe'll.teerdel"
were to have apeasure on the subject
to- have it at once without delay; This .Bill
be bitter
with the licensing-system, sod thonoi 1t:e.74.!,11 dealt only
any very great result from that,
milli he thought,ln" expect
reasoneehe:had given, that it would ate betterfor the
Bill a second reading. .o'B. this'
• Mr. ELLIOTT opposed the Bill,hein a' eree to its
principteaa well as to the detaili by P
Which it was pro-
Posed to carry oat that principle,

Mr. F. MACKENZIE in replr, said his wish was
that the Bill should he read a second time, in order that
it might be referred to a Select Committee, said ho
thought it better to take that course than to refer the
whole subject to a general Committee, the result of
which would only be fruitless resolutions, and the post-
ponement of all legislation.
Lard MELGUND said that the course which the Hon.
Member proposed was certainly a most extraordinary
one; it was asking the House first to affirm the principle
of a Bill, and then to inquire afterwards whether that
principle was a good one. He believed that this system
of legislation would be vicious, and would produce evils
which dia not as yet exist.
Mr. BOUVERIE wished to call the attention of the
House to the fact, that of ell the Hon. Members who
had spoken in support of the Bill there was not one who
bad advanced a single argument in its favour.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading 123
Against it ... ... 67
Majority... —56

The Bill was then read a second time.
ENFRANCHISEMENT OF COPYHOLDS BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. HODGSON suggested that the second reading
might be postponed until this day week. The Bill was
only printed and delivered yesterday. •
Mr. AGLIONBY declined to accede to the request.
The Bill was not a new one, but was one which was
postponed from last session, and which was founded
upon the report of a Committee who had sat upon the
subject.

Mr. CHRISTOPHER had looked into the provisions
of the Bill, but not being a professional man he con-
fessed he could not entirely understand it Us there-
fore thought the appeal for a postponement was quite
justifiable.

Mr. AGLIONBY said the principle of the Bill was
in accordance with the Real Property Commission
that sat in 1832. In addition to that a Committee was
subsequently appointed to consider the subject of oopy-
hold enfranchisement, before whom the late Sir Robert
Peel gave most important evidence, and a Bill was af-
terwards passed authorising voluntary enfranchisement,
Last year and the year previous the matter was again
taken up, and ultimately referred to a second Committee,
who came to the unanimous resolution to recommend this
Bill to the House. It was accordingly laid on - the
table late last session, and had since been considered
by the country, and it was generally allowed that the
provisions of the Bill were as favourable to the lord as to
the tenant. It was intended that its provisions should
be carried out under the superintendence of a commis-
sion; and he had little doubt that it would be found to
work well.

Sir GEORGE STIUCKLAND did not think the Bill
d4lt out equal justice to both sides. It was a com-
pulsory Bill of a unr-sided character, and he was
very much afraid it would do incalculable injury.
He readily admitted that the old antiquated copy-
hold tenure wai unsound in principle, but
did the Bill do away with copyholds? Certainly not, it
left behind a remnant of the old system, and, therefore,
until they could legislate in such a way as to secure the
interests of both the landlord and the tenant, they
ought not to advance a step in the matter.. The com-
pensation claims of this Bill were highly objectionable,
and he still gave it bis'humble opposition.
Mr. HUME said the object of the Bill was to abolish
copyholds altogether, and he fully approved of it. With
regard to the compensation clauses they could be got
rid of as amended in Committee.

Mr. FRESHFIELD had heard nothing which should
induce him to oppose the Bill. It W61.5i for the public
interest that the pernicious system of copyhold tenure
should be abolished, and the'lS.lll should have his hearty
support. - _

MULLINGS supported the Bil.l, and hoped it
would tvA be rejected because it contained some defect
in its detail.

The Bill was th'en ordered to be read a second time
this day fortcight. ,
COUNTY RATES AND EXPENDITURE BILL.

On the motion ferethe second reading of this Bill,
Sir j. PAKINGTON said this was another Bill
which had been carried over from last session, but since
;hen his opinion had undergone no change whatever
upon the subject of the Bill, „end he Must continue to
give it his decided oppositiou. It was proposed by the
Bill to transfer the management of the county rates
to a theatre that was entirely tie& for the
task. He had no desire to undervalue the
importance of taxation being accompanied by represen-
tation, but the management of county-rates was an ex-
ception to the mite and that argument would- not apply
in this instance. The Bill was not the one recommended
by the Committee last session, or he might have felt
himself precluded from offering any opposition to it.
The House should remember that the Committee last
session was composed of some of the most distinguished
Members of the House, including the Right Hon. the Se-
cretary of State far the Home Department and the Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon; and after long and
careful investigation, the Committee came to the resolu-
tion of recommending a particular Bill, which the Right
Hon. Member for Manchester had taken upon himself to
set aside for the sake of introducing this measure; and he
hoped therefore the House would not sanction the second
reading. Neither the House nor the Government could
be prepared to take the management of the police and
county gaols out of the bands of the magistracy of
England, and as this question was one of too much mag-
nitude and importance to be left in the hands of a private
Member, he called upon the House to join him in pra_
venting its adoption until it had been fully sanctioned
and brought in bysotne responsible Minister.—(Hear.)
Mr. ROBERT *PALMER contended that the princi-
ple of this Bill was vastly different to the one which he
was prepared to support last year as well as now. He
did not object to• the provision which gave the rate-
payers a voice in the management of county affairs,
but they ought to enjoy it with the magistracy, and he
was not prepared to support such an unjust species
of legislation. In his part of the country the ratepayers
took very little interest in this question; he had made
them fully acquainted. with its principle and details, but
they bad forwarded ne petition or communication upon
the subject, and he presumed from that circumstance that
they cared very little about the matter. Oh the other
band, he believed they were quite 'satisfied with the pre-
sent systein, arid the House should pause before they at-
tempted to disturb it.. Until Phu saw a stronger expres-
sion of opinion in the country-in favour of the Bill, he
should always be prepared to oppose it.—(Hear.)
Mr. M. GIBBOX considered the Hen. Meinber had
no right to assume that because the unions adverted
to were silent they were therefore opposed to
the Bill. The -mode adopted for constituting the
boards was very just and proper, viz., to give
the ratepayers the power of selecting persons, whether
Magistrates or not, whom they thought were best quali-
fied to be members of financial boards for the aesess-
ment and expenditure of the county rates. In making
the alterations in the Bill he had acted in accordance
with the principles which the Committee of
the House had laid down—(Hear, hear)—that the
boards should .be strictly financial, and not interfere
in the slightest degree with the judicial duties of the
magistracy. The Bill contained a great deal that had
bten recommended by the Committee. He admitted it
was very desirable that the Government should bake up
the waiter.—(hear, hear.) The Honourable Mem-
ber for Montrone was the first volunteer who brought
the question before the House, and unless there were
volunteers in legislation they would never progress
, all, because the Government could not introduce any
measures that were necessery. And no one showed a
greater example in volunteer legislation than the Hon. •
Member for Droiteich.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Mil-
ner Gibson) considered that when the House delibe-
rately sanctioned a principle, as it had done the prin-
ciple of this Bill, it was the duty of the Executive-
Government to carry out that principle in practical
legislation. He would, therefore, most gladly abandon
the measure if the Government would promise to take it
iu hand. The Earl of Derby had stated that the great
and rapid increase of county rates well deserved atten-
tion, and that in the county with which he was con-
bected they had risen from 77,0001. in 1823 to 175,0001. in
1848, and that it was an anomaly dud such a sum should
be assessed and expended by the magistrates without the
control of the ra:eptlyers.—(Hear.) The prayer of a pe-
tition presented to the House by the farmers of Busk-
inghamshire ulso made a similar statement, and asked
for some remedy. Ea had no wish to rouse up
any bad feeling .in the country, but only
t, obtain : the appointment of boards competed of fit,
proper, and, bosibeis men to control the county rates.
'He hoped the Wiese would not throw out the Bill on
the second reading,' and'ullew
the magistrates to con-
biltadtheecniaraiiietpar.yaetersp,ay
"Atte toexereise at, irrespciesible control over the money
sore,t
0 ri
allow
eui
ayb uf_tr the"
;71-yo somau bl
legislation
agreeingisia tt.e
e w toas
ht he
eeeteresey
era that, contra which undoubtedly
were entitled to poisesse
thahrenees,teet said.there were very important
irociiieed
(Hear
this Bill and the one tortherly in
eion that he tati, hheli.L) stated On a former occa-
. ,
inedy, nor any :hretptu'rei, was ho . great ode to re-
ef county mese *ad. hnte existaig in the menegenetnt
irnattliso;sehears,serattietnht:tibu.yeitibatstitila
erbaei4hteti. zwtoinatutiiToettehanet,
a xa p.
tehn6dui tguhr.
tesehe
deny the chneielous •et tt
ehe said he was unable to
it
which !evrerreepreseutative :seratem
iwaitt(h)
thet tbeonfifisty
' added,. he
aotThoroughly
was nevertheless aware at f.
,the :ne:l7cisit;edd
understuod by tho3e w4O
-`4`• PrePued. the Bill; a: a,
that 0cca.404 he.
nature of the subject.,
they resented to the second reading on
cenditioe that it 41,46 to be teferrechta a Select Com-
mittee, :But isr ;he' present Bill- the- recommends: of Atte' Coetiettee had. not been. attended
to. Thefor instance, we
magistrates, fbi
the were
"
originally proposed, to form a pc-rt of
.biiard unless
elected, and they were thus virtually cs?tluded front an
perticipation in the administration ofwas the funds; and
not prepared that was an exclusion to which heto
'"sent- It the Bill remained in its present state it
should receive his opposition in every seete of
its progress. He did not ace that any pracCoat
i
result would be arrived at by agreeing to the second
reading, the time of the House would only be wasted
witlessly and
uselesely, and thceigh adnering to the
principle which it aoug„lat to establish, he felt compelled
to refuse his assent to its (metier progress.
said
Mr. BRIGHT observed that nothieg had been
which showed that if legislation was desirable on the
subject, a good' Bili might not be made out of the
measure of his Hen.
) Eln accused
the Secretary or the Home Department of being for-
merly a concealed, hut now an ehateeeheet of a mea-
sure for the appeinement of eseatty financial lwd&
Mr. DEEDES said, having. been, a member of the
Committee, he could bear testimony. to the impartial
part which had been taken bye's° Secretary of the
florae Department.—(Hear.) The very material altera-
tions made in the Bill were not matters of detail, but of
principle.( Hear.) The Ron. Member repudiated the
asiertion, tlaet any party motives aetnated,tha opponents
of Ulu • •