The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-22 00:00:00

The Anti-Liquor Traffic Movement.

On Wednesday evening a public banquet, at-
tended by gentlemen from many of the principal
towns in the kingdom, took place in the Free-trade
Hall, Manchester, intended as " a demonstration to
the country, in view of the coming general election,
that the supporters of Mr. Lawson's bill, outside
the House of Commons, are united and enthusiastic,
and that those members who voted with him are not
discouraged." The meeting was organised by the
executive committee of the United Kingdom Alliance
for the Total Suppression of the Liquor Traffic.
Nearly 1,000 gentlemen sat down to the repast,
which was more costly and substantial than might
be supposed from the remembrance of some former
"banquets" in the same place, held in connection
with other agitations. Ladies were admitted to the
galleries only, and were supplied with dessert ; and
as a large number of gentlemen availed themselves
of the same accommodation, the upper portions of
the room were well filled. The beautiful hall was
extremely well decorated with banners, &c., for the
occasion. A good band was also in attendance.
Among the gentlemen present were Sir W. C. Tre-
velyan (in the chair), Sir Wilfred Lawson, Sir
Robert Brisco, Mr. Wilfred Lawson, M.P.; Mr.
Joseph Crook, Bolton ; the Rev. Professor Kirk,
Edinburgh ; Dr. F. R. Lees, Leeds ; Mr. W. Law-
son, of Brayton, Carlisle ; Mr. Arthur Brisco ; Mr.
W. Gilbert, London ; Mr. S. Pope ; the Rev. W.
N. Molesworth, Rochdale ; Dr. Munroe, Hull ; the
Rev. Canon Jenkins ; the Rev. Dr. Gale, rector of
Treborough ; the Rev. W. Mackenzie, of Douglas,
Isle of Man ; the Rev. T. Dean, rural dean,
Warton Vicarage, Lancaster ; the Rev. Canon
Toole (Roman Catholic) ; Mr. Thomas Clegg, Man-
chester ; and Mr. John Robert Taylor, London.
Letters of apology for non-attendance had been
received from a large number of members of Par-
liament and others, including the Dean of Carlisle
and the Recorder of Birmingham, who were pre-
vented by ill-health ; and General T. P. Thompson,
who " recorded his adhesion to the objects of the
Alliance," and had consented to be one of its vice-
presidents. The following letter was received from
the Rev. W. Darby :--
"Ashmore, Ludwell, Salisbury, April 12.
"My dear Sir,—Perhaps I may be permitted to mention
that Ashmore is an instance, on -a small scale, of the ad-
vantages arising from what may be called the practical
application of the Permissive Bill. Mr. Howard, the
squire, will not allow any public-house or beershop to be
built here. He has given the people distinctly to under-
stand that he shall regard the attempt to have anything of
the kind as an act of personal hostility to himself. Besides,
be successfully resisted a skilful manoeuvre on the part of
a neighbouring brewer to purchase, for £BOO, an almost
valueless piece of ground, clearly for the purpose of erect-
ing a. public-house on what would then have been his own
freehold. The result of the squire's plan has been confes-
sedly beneficial to the parish. Liquor, I am sorry to add,
is illicitly sold in one or two houses. Even so the absence
of a licensed place of sale for intoxicating drinks is a great
boon. The defrauders of the revenue carry on their lu-
crative but unlawful calling at their own peril. On the
whole, however, I feel that the good outweighs the harm.
Ashmore is in Dorsetshire, but on the borders of Wiltshire.
The population is about 370. With sincere wishes for the
success of your good cause, I am, your obedient servant,
" WILLIAM DARBY."
The Rev. W. N. MOLESWORTII, of Rochdale,
moved the first resolution :
" That this meeting, contemplating the great and crying
evils inseparable from the common sale of intoxicating
liquors, calls upon Parliament speedily to enact an effective
remedial measure."
He said he felt the greater interest on the occasion,
because he had just witnessed a contested election at
Rochdale, during which he could not walk 20 steps
without meeting a drunken man. The circumstances
attending our elections were a national disgrace,
and they were one of the greatest difficulties to con-
tend with in this matter. _ How was it possible a man
elected under such circumstances could lend a
favourable ear to the remedy proposed ? Nothing
was easier than to object to a proposal ; nothing
more difficult than to devise a remedy. Among the
speakers in the House of Commons on the Permis-
sive Bill was Mr. Bright—(cheers)—who was fully
acquainted with the subject, and he did propose a
remedy, but with so much hesitation that he evi-
dently doubted its efficacy. No other proposal but
that of the Affiance was before the public---it was
that or nothing. Nothing could be better than the
way in which the Permissive Bill was introduced las
Session by Mr. Lawson—(cheers)—but as the dis.
cussion advanced, the want of speaking power be-

came evident ; and the Alliance could devote itself
to no work more important than that of placing Mr.
Pope—(cheers)—face to face with Mr. Roebuck—

(laughter)—on the floor of the House. Let Mr. Pope
be the O'Connell of this movement. (Cheers.)
Mr. JOSEPH THORP, of Halifax, seconded the re-
solution.

Mr. LAWSON, M.P., was received with much cheer-
ing as he rose to support the motion. He said it
seemed to him that thequestion as to what the future
legislation of this country should be with regard to
the liquor traffic might now be called the irrepress-

ible question of British politics. (Applause.) He
looked with the greatest satisfaction upon this meet-

ing. They had boasted some time back that the
working classes were with them, and that fact was
at once the justification and strength of the move-
ment. But the working classes of this country
were not yet, although he hoped they soon would
be, intrusted with political power. (Applause.)
There were now, however, present representatives
of the middle and upper classes, proving that they
were taking the matter up, and that the convic-
tion was pressing home upon their minds that un-

just and unequal laws must not only be resisted by
one class of the community, but that when one class

suffered all suffered. (Applause.) Never let it be

forgotten what was the object with which the United
Kingdom Alliance was formed. It was to create and

concentrate public opinion to such a pitch that it
should compel the House of Commons to carry out
the suggestion which was made to it on this question
30 years ago, by a select committee appointed to in-
quire closely into the subject. That committee,
composed of the ablest men of the day, reported
that it was desirable for the Government to bring in
some general, comprehensive measure for the pro-
gressive diminution and ultimate suppression of all
existing means and facilities for intemperance. That

was the object of the United Kingdom Alliance,

(Loud applause.) The measure they introduced was

a general one, which would have been applicable in
all parts of the country where public opinion was
prepared for its coming into operation. The system
of prohibition, which they proposed to put into the
power of localities to adopt, had always answered

where it had been already adopted. But the House
of Commons had refused to allow the people of this
country in their separate localities to make that trial,

and it now behoved the friends of that measure to

see what ought to be their policy. There was,
how -
ever, no reason to despair. He had great faith in
the power of reason and common sense when brought
into play in a free country. There had lately entered
into the arena of contest upon the Permissive Bill
question a veryfierce antagonist. He referred to Mr.
Leatham. Mr. Leatham first said he objected to all
permissive measures. This objection was merely an
opinion of Mr. Leatham's, and they had nothing to
do but to set their opinion against it, and say that
permissive Acts had been efficient. Our towns were
governed by corporations and local boards, which
worked very well, and which dealt with the
very delicate matter of taxation. But if Mr.
Leatham objected so totally to permissive Acts, that
was a fatal objection to the present system of
licensing public-houses. (Applause.) Then Mr.
Leatham was very much alarmed because he thought
there would be fierce struggles in every parish. He
(Mr. Lawson) wondered what men were born for
except to struggle. We lived in a world of sin,
wrong, and injustice, and if we were not to struggle
the sooner we were out of the world the better.
(Loud applause.) If Mr. Leatham objected so
much to struggles, why did he go and disturb the
equanimity of the town of Huddersfield ? (Ap-
plause.) If he (Mr. Lawson) was not very much

mistaken, next July there would be a greater row
in Huddersfield—(loud cheers)—than there "would

be in twenty parishes together under the Permissive
Bill. (Renewed cheering.) He was the other day
reading a work recently republished, written by
Earl Russell before he degenerated into a peer—
(great laughter)—in which his lordship said, "Mock
philosophers are always lamenting over- political