The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-21 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Some curious statements were made last night, on the
motion for the second reading of the Sale of Beer Licenses
Bill. The opposition to the second reading commenced
with Mr. Warburton, who moved that it be read a second
time that day six months, on the ground, chiefly, that
they were about to pass a Bill which affected the humbler
class of persons, with whom, at that late period of the
session, they would have no opportunity of consulting.
Mr. Spring Rice was more anxious to account for the
delay in bringing in the Bill, than to insist on its passing
this session. The cause of delay was the referring the
matter to a Committee, and the time taken up in the
inquiry. What the Right Hon. Gentleman stated, with
regard to the leaving no discretionary power to magistrates
to grant or refuse licenses to beer shops is unanswerable.
But the most curious part of the discussion was the
statement of Mr. Fysche Palmer. He admitted
that the beer shops made people drink somewhat
more than they otherwise would, because the beer
was better than that sold in the public houses, and
men had a stronger temptation to drink good beer than
to drink bad beer. By the Bill allowing beer shops,
"good beer was made more general, and when it was
good, it did not give persons the stomach-ache, and,
adding to that, its being sold at a low price, it was not
surprising that a little more intoxication took place.
However, he saw no further evils in the Bill ; and he
thought that a great deal that was said against its bad
effects arose out of an angry feeling on the part of his
fellow Magistrates. Beer sellers could get licenses without
applying to the Magistrates—they could obtain them from
the Excise—so that they were not so subservient to the
Magistrates, and passed them without condescending to
take off their hats to them. This feeling of independence
and lack of courtesy was the cause of angry feelings on
the part of his brother Magistrates; and be believed that
the beer shops were allowed to run riot and become
mischievous, in order that there might be an excuse
for putting them down. If the measure before them
were allowed to pass, nine-tenths of the beer shops
would be put down, because it would be impossible
for them to get the six sureties required in order
to have a license. If the six sureties were taken from
all England, it would be possible to get them, but
two were to be of the parish in which the beer-shop was
to he opened, and he would be prepared to show in
Committee, if the Bill should reach that st ige, that it
would be impossible to get these two sureties. The
influence of any neighbouring gentleman or nobleman
would prevent it." We are strongly inclined to believe
that this statement of Mr. F. Palmer hits the nail on the
head. It appears from it that the Beer Bill, by with-
drawing the houses from the influence of the brewers'
monopoly, improved the beer—that it has secured the
working people from being poisoned by the deleterious
stuff which the monopoly forced on public-houses. The
Legislature should be very cautious in depriving the poor
of an acknowledged benefit merely on the ground of the
privilege having led incidentally to abuses. Drinking is,
we regret to say, the besetting sin of Englishmen. To
drink beer, however, is far less mischievous that to drink .
spirits. The spirit-drinker, by weakening his digestive
organs, becomes in a short time a burden to himself, and
a curse to all who have anything to do with him. As
far as our experience goes, we should say that the
spirit-drinker is gone beyond recovery—that he has
not sufficient strength to abandon the vice. But the
drinking of beer seldom injures the digestive organs
materi.lly, and as Englishmen will drink, it is better
that they should drink beer, than be driven by ale that
gives them the stomach-ache, to the drinking of spirits.
What is said about the conspiracy of Magistrates against
the beer houses, and their connivance at the abuses, in or-
der to have a pretext for putting them down, wears a
great air of truth. Before any inconsistent legislation is
had recourse to, it would he well to make trial of what
can be effected by subjecting them to the same regulations
as public-houses. The Government seems perfectly aware
of the necessity of withdrawing them from the magistrates
in all that regards licensing. It is proper, however, that
there should be a control over them. If facilities are af-
forded to poachers, thieves, &c., in these houses, the ohs
vious remedy is to give a power to constables to visit
them at all hours. Mr. Fysche Palmer thought that,
by next year, the small country beer shops, which
are the chief causes of crime, will have died off. Al-
lowing, with Lord Althorp, "that it seemed univer-
sally the opinion of those who had the best opportunity
of judging of the operation of the beer houses, that they
had been the cause of a great increase of crime," it does
not follow that they ought to be shut, or indirectly put
down. All great changes lead, at first, to irregularities.
We can easily understand why, when the agricultural
labourers found themselves in places where they were free
from all controul, they should, like all slaves broke loose,
abuse their liberty. But the remedy is not to add to the
price of the beer, by exacting high duties for licences, nor
to exact such securities as cannot be procured ; but to
deal with the abuses as they arise. When the Magistrates
see that they cannot put down the beer-shops, they wiil
soon discover means of remedying the disorders to which
they have given rise. The Bill was abandoned for this
Session ; and by next Session more information will be
obtained, both with respect to the nature of the evils
which have arisen from the beer-houses and the mode of
dealing with them.—Morning Chronicle.