The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-11 00:00:00

THIS DAYS' SHIPPING.

LONDON, May 11.—Wind this day at noon—South-
west; light breeze ; weather mild, with a good deal of
rain.

PLYMOUTH, May 10.—Wind S.S.W.—Arrived—Par-
[and, from Sierra Leone.

QUEENSTOWN, May 9.—Arrived—Eliza Hunter, from
Cardenas ; Union, from Monte Video ; Robert Hastio,
from Baltimore.

BELFAST, May 9.—Wind NM.—Arrived—Elizabeth
Cann, from St. John's, N.B.
FLEETWOOD, May 10.—Wind S W.—Sailed—Cleopa-
tra, for Miramichi.

LERWICK, May 9.—" Wind N.W.—Sailed—Chase, screw
steamer, for Davis' Straits.
CLYDE, May 10.—Wind S.W.—Arrived.—Genoa, from
New Orleans.

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
SOUTHAMPTON Friday Morning.

Wind W.S.W. ; rain.

(BY SUBMARINE AND BRITISH TELEGRAPH.)
GRAVESEND, Friday Morning.
Wind S.W.; tide five hours' ebb, weather cloudy.
DEAL, Friday Morning.

_
Wind S.S.W.; light.
Tossed—Sardinian, screw steamer, from the naditerra"
neon ; Berkshire, from Moulmein; Regina, iron/ Antigua
for London.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five lock.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Buckley and Connah's Quay (Flintshire) Railway,
the Tenbury and Bewdley Railway, the London and Sout2i-
"Western Railway (new line to Bristol, -Exetei,'Xc.), and
the Horsham and Steyning and Heeding Roads bills were
read a second time.

The Kilrush and Kilkee Railway, the Poalnashen7, the
Manchester and Buxton Road, and the East Somerset
Railway bills were read a third time and passed.

INDIAN FINANCE.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE hoped that the Go-
vernment, so soon as possible, would present their lordships
with copies of the minute issued by the Governor
of Madras with reference to the new scheme of
Indian finance. The minute had been published in many
of the Indian newspapers, and there could not be any ob-
jection to furnishing the paper.

The Duke of ARGYLL said there would bo no objec-
tion to produce the minute alluded to by the nobl.. marquis.

PAPER DUTY REPEAL BILL,

This bill was brought in and read a first time, on the
motion of Lord REDESDALE.

Lord MONTEROLE said he took this, the earliest, op-
portunity of giving notice that, on the motion for reading
this bill a second time, he should move that it be read a
second time that day six months. (Hear, hear, from the
Opposition.)

The Earl of WICKLOW said he hoped the Government
would allow plenty of time to consider the bill before the
second reading. He was adverse to seeing bills that had
been agreed to by the other House of Parliament rejected
by their lordships, yet there were some exceptions to that
rule, and the present measure under discussion was one of
them. If the Government persevered with the bill, he
trusted their lordships would refuse to give it a second read-
ing. (Hear, hear.)

Earl GRANVILLE, in moving the second reading of
this bill, which had been adopted by the House of Commons,
entered into an explanation of its provisions, the object of
which he said was to simplify the tariff and to give greater
facilities to trade ; but the noble lord spoke in so low a tone
of voice that he was scarcely audible in the gallery. On
ordinary occasions he said it was necessary in proposing the
second reading of such a bill to state all the arguments in
its favour; but most of those arguments were connected
with the general question of the French tre ity, upon which
a debate had already taken place in that house, and he would
not, therefore, re-open the discussion unless it were neces-
sary or required by their lordships. Ho should, however,
be happy to give any explanation with regard to the bill.
The Earl of DERBY—My lords, I will offer no opposi-
tion to the proposal which the noble earl has just made upon
the part of her Majesty's Government, and if I abstain at this
time from discussing the policy of the Government upon this
subject, we do not thereby intend to signify an acquiescence
in, much less an approval of, the course they have pursued in
regard to the treaty with France. (Hear, hear.) When the
treaty was first announced, we on this side of the house
stated the objections we entertained to the terms of it so far as
they were then known. We entertained those objections as
strongly when we were better acquainted with the details,
and every day that passes strengthens my conviction that her
Majesty's Government, in making use of ♦ery inexperienced
agents, in departing from the ordinary course of diplomacy,
and in entering into the consideration of this subject with
very inadequate means of information, have unfortunately
placed the country in a very serious difficulty by having en-
tered into a very disadvantageous treaty. And at the pre-
sent moment, as regards the advantages supposed to be de-
rived from it, we are absolutely and entirely at the mercy
of the French Government, and from the scanty accounts
we hear I am certainly not disposed to believe that the
French Government will use with very great moderation
the power which has been most unwisely entrusted to them.
(Hear.) At the same time I agree with the noble earl that
the occasions must be very rare indeed when your lordships
may feel it your incumbent duty to reject a proposition con-
nected with the finances and commerce of the country
which has boon made on the responsibility of the Govern-
ment and has received the sanction of the House of Com-
mons ; and of course these considerations weigh with much
greater force when it is not only a question as between the
House of Coramc.ns and the country, but a question also
which involves the negotiations with a foreign power, and
the maintenance of a treaty by which, koweyer much we
may disapprove of it, we are in point of fact bound. But,
as your lordships are aware, the bill compromises several
different subjects, and if we object to any one of its provi-
sions it is not possible for us, consistently with the privi-
leges of the House of Commons, to eliminate that one and
send back the bill so amended to the other house. We have
no choice but its acceptance as a whole or its absolute re-
jection, which would disturb the whole financial arrange-
ments of the Government, and also interfere with those
commercial arrangements which have been entered into on
the full understanding that the system adopted by the
House of Commons would be carried out. I therefore
think that, while on the one hand it would be very unwise
to take on myself the responsibility of asking your lordships
to reject the proposal, I cannot, on the other, avoid saying,
that in my belief the arrangements made, including the
treaty, are of the most improvident and most dangerous
character—(hear, hear)—and that the financial condition of
the country, not only in the present year, but still more in
the next year, is a matter of the deepest anxiety to the
mind of every man who has seriously turned his attention
to the subject. (Hear, hear.) Undoubtedly these are pro-
posals, calculated to aggravate that difficulty, for taking off
duties which, on a fitting occasion, might be very justly and
wisely reduced, but ought not to be reduced in the present
condition of the country. Nevertheless, we are bound to
sanction the present bill. We are compelled to adopt pro-
positions for reductions in the already too small revenue of
the country. There is, however, another question with
which the terms of the treaty do not in the slightest degree
interfere, and with regard to which no negotiations or com-
mercial-arrangements have as yet been made, but in respect
of which her Majesty's Government are calling upon this
country to make a wholly useless and dangerous sacrifice of
the permanent revenue to the amount of X 1,500,000. (Hear,
hear.) I need not say that I allude to the bill for the aboli-
tion of the paper duties. (Hear.) My noble friend who sits
on the cross benches (Lord Monteagle) has given notice of
his intention to oppose the second reading of that•-bill; and`
I feel that so far from embarrassing the Government,-or in-
terfering with any of their other arrangements, or in the
slightest degree prejudicing the financial or other business of
the country, the rejection of that bill will tend materially
to improve their whole scheme. The noble earl knows that
no exertion will be wanting on my part to obtain the re-
jection of that bill, and thereby to save to the Government
a very large portion of revenue. I cannot help thinking
that the noble earl has confounded two matters which are
entirely distinct. He speaks of the reductions made in
the tariff being a relief to the consumer to a certain
amount, and says that the consequent loss to the re-
venue had been considerably lessened by the increased
consumption, but when he assumes there has been a relief to
the consumer he is not entitled to take as that relief the

whale amount of the duty taken off, because he will find
that upon several of those matters upon which the duty
has been taken off the consumer is obtaining no relief
whatever. The price of the articles upon which the duty
has been removed has been kept up, if not increased, and I
cannot therefore admit that the relief to the consumer is
equivalent to the amount of the reduction of duty. I will
not enter further at present into the subject of the commer-
cial and financial arrangements of the Government, or of
their policy. Your lordships will recollect that before Easter
it was stated by the noble earl that he thought it would be
convenient that the whole of these financial arrangements
should be brought under your lordships' discussion, and I
think the most fitting occasion for that purpose will be
when you are dealing with that important item of a million
and a half, which is involved in the abolition of the paper
duty. (Hear, hoar.)

The bill was then read a second time.
LUNATIC ASULUM IN DONEGAL.
Viscount LIFFOR.D moved for a copy of the order in
council naming the village of Letterkenny as a place where
the proposed lunatic asylum of the county of Donegal is to
be built. The noble lord objected to Letterkenny as being
too remote from the principal towns, and inconvenient of
access, and pointed out several other more eligible sites for
the institution. lie complained that a considerable slight
had been thrown upon a body of gentlemen whose duties
were bound up with these asylums, viz., the landed proprie-
tors and gentry of the county. He was authorised by the
Marquis of Abercorn, the lord-lieutenant and largest pro-
prietor in the county, and by the Earl of Arran, the owner
of nearly the whole barony of Innisowen, to express their
strong disapproval of the contemplated site for the building. I

He had also received letters from the Marquis of Donegall,
and 12 magistrates of the county to the same effect, and
only from three persons in favour of the project. He re-
gretted extremely that the noble earl (the Lord-Lie utenant)
was not then in his place, as he then would ha felt it his
duty to express himself more strongly with r and td the
matter. But he would at least say this, tha nobody con-
nected with an English county would endu he treatment
which those in the county of Donegal ha 1 , eceived at the
hands of the Irish Government.
Earl GRANVILLE expressed his regret that the noble
earl (Earl of Carlisle) was not in his place. In the absence
of the noble lord he could not undertake to pronounce an
opinion on the merits of the question, but there would be
no objection on the part of the Government to the produc-
tion of the papers, and their lordships would then be in a
position to decide upon it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR having put the question,
The Earl of LEITRIM said he was not surprised at the
Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland being absent, and he thought
the noble lord acted very prudently in tayine-, away.
Earl GRANVILLE said that the noble earl the Lord-
Lieutenant of Ireland was not in Loudon at the present
time. If the noble earl opposite wished to make an attack
upon his noble friend, he would suggest that due notice
should be given to him. At that moment there was no
question, he believed, before their lordships, for he under-
stood the motion had been agreed to.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the question had
been put, but he did not think it had beet). carried.
The Earl of LEITRIM said that his noble friend near
him had called their lordships' attention( to a very serious
question connected with the proposed trigonometrical posi-
tion of the lunatic asylum for the county of Donegal. That
was the decision of the Irish Government, and he strongly
objected to the mode in which that Government was con-
ducted, by being made entirely subservient to electioneer-
ing purposes. He objected to the humbug of her Majesty's
Government bringing a Reform Bill into the House of Com-
mons to reform that house whilst the Lord-Lieutenant of
Ireland was corrupting that country in its highest source.
Even in the matter of a lunatic asylum the Lord-Lieutenant
could not ect without an eye to electioneering interest.
There was no excuse for the Lord-Lieutenant. It had been
a thousand times said in the other House of Parliament
that Ireland was safe with a lord-lieutenant to prevent jobs,
and that, as he was responsible to Parliament, property and
public security might be safely entrusted to him. He (the
noble earl) held diametrically opposite opinions, and that
the present Lord-Lieutenant in particular was one of the
greatest mischief makers in the whole of that country. The
whole Government was unsafe. The gentry were set aside,
the Government was in the hands of stipendiaries, from the
Lord-Lieutenant downwards, and consequently these jobs
took place. Here was a very gross instance, and a gross
job. Within the last five years there had been expended,
and very properly, no less than £306,114 on lunatic asy-
lums in different parts of Ireland. Within a few miles of
this very town where it was proposed to build an asylum
there had been expended during the last five years £41,451,
and in Derry since 1856, £1,425. About fifteen years ago a
rule was laid down that all lunatic asylums in Ireland
should be erected in assize towns only, and he should like
to be informed on what principle that rule was Row to be
departed from. It was of the utmost importance that per-
sons improperly confined in lunatic asylums should have
an opportunity of being released ; but if those asylums were
built in remote places it would be difficult for them to have
that opp rtunity. There could be no good object in laying
out several thousands pounds in erecting a lunatic asylum in
that part of Donegal ; it would bo far easier and better to
make some addition to the asylum already existing. He
found, however, from the report of last year, that there was
at this moment no excess of lunacy in that part of Ireland,
but rather a diminution. In Derry and Donegal together
there were only 214 eases in the asylums, six in the prisons,
and very few in the poorhouses. This asylum, therefore,

was not wanted, and the project was altogether objection-
able. He did not think it satisfactory that when a matter
of this kind was brought forward by the Government on its
own responsibility no explanation should be offered to their
lordships. Why should not the Lord-Lieutenant be present
to answer for his own jobs, or, at any rate, some one been
sent down to Bath in order to ascertain from the noble earl
how this question was to be answered in his absence ? Why
did not the noble earl, who was said to be responsible, come
down to that house when notice of a question had been given,
and make some of those pretty speeches he made in Dublin ?
(A laugh.) On one occasion when he (the Earl of Leitrim)
made a motion respecting Ireland, he founi by the Dublin
newspapers that his speech was answered by the noble earl
the Lord-Lieutenant at a public meeting in Dublin. He
thought.that was highly improper, and not respectful to
their lordships' house. The general feeling of the country
was exactly such as he had expressed—that the Government
did everything in Ireland with reference to electioneering
jobs. They had lately seen how the lord-lieutenancy of
Londonderry had been given away, aid also the lord-lieu-
tenancy of Roscommon. He would only and that through-
out Ireland the lord -lieutenancy was held in the most
thorough contempt, and that with respect to the Earl of
Carlisle in particular, the feeling prevailed that the Govern-
ment had sent him to Ireland on purpose to disgust the
Irish people still further with the office of lord-lieutenant.
The Earl of EGLINT ON said that during the absence of
the noble earl the Lord-Lientem.nt sm.,- e,:-
to attempt to pronounce anopinion on the question towhich
the noble earl near him had alluded. lie quite acquitted
his noble friend the Lord-Lieutenant of all the charges of
jobbery or corruption brought against him. Though the
question of lunatic asylums was not brought before him
(the Earl of Eglinton) when he was lord-lieutenant, he
knew how such questions came before the lord-lieutenant.
They went before a committee of the Privy Council, and the
lord-lieutenant, who signed the decision of that committee,
was as innocent of all blame in the matter as any of their
lordships. But while he acquitted the noble earl, he did not
acquit the system, which 12e considered entirely erroneous.
He entirely acquitted the 111;d,Lieutenant of Ireland of all
blame in this matter, but he thought it would be much bet-
ter for Ireland if the system were changed. Although it
was impossible for the Lord Lieutenant to be away from his
duty, still he (the Earl of Eglinton) thought some member
of the Government might have been prepared to answer for
him.

Earl GRANVILLE was understood to say that he was
not in possession of the information required.
After a few words from the Earl of DESART,
The Earl of CLANCARTY was of opinion that the insti-
tution of viceroyalty, with the office filled by a nobleman
who was a stranger to the country, was ono of great value
to Ireland. So far, therefore, he dissented from the opinions
which had been expressed by his noble friend (the Earl of
Leitrim.)

The Earl of LEITRIM disclaimed having said anything
against the office of Lord Lieutenant in Ireland. His com-
plaint was against the noble lord who at present filled the
office.

The motion was agreed to, and their lordships adjourned

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'cleek.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Lords' amendments to the Manchester Improvement
Bill were considered and agreed to, and the bill was ordered
for third reading.
The following private bills were read a third time :
Belfast and Ballymena Railway; Bucks County Rata;
Great Northern and Western (of Ireland) Railway, and
Limerick and Ennis Railway.
The Abergavenny Improvement, and Leeds Township
Bills were considered, and ordered for third reading.
PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented against the Wine
Licenses Bill, the Registration Bill, the Medical Relief Bill,
the Census Bill, &c.
NATIONAL DEFENCES.
Mr. F. SMITH gave notice that on the motion for the
adjournment of the house to -morrow evening, he would ask
the Secretary for War certain questions relative to the na-
tional defences.
SCOTCH AND IRISH REFORM BILLS.
Mr. BAXTER asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Akrairs whether, in consideration of the committee on the
Reform Bill for England and Wales having been deferred
till June, and with a view to expedite the passing of that
measure, he would agree to postpone the Scotch and Irish
Reform Bills till the next session of Parliament
Mr. SCULLY asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, whether he would agree to postpone going into
committee on the Representation of the People Bill until
after the second reading of the Representation of the People
(Ireland) Bill; or whether, with a view to uniformity of
legislation, he would introduce provisions applicable to Ire-
land into the Representation of the People Bill, so that
Parliamentary Reform fcr both countries may proceed pari
passu ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it would be most inconve •
silent to proceed further with the Irish Reform Bill until
after the English Reform Bill had been' into committee.
It was then proposed to proceed with the second reading of
the bill. As regarded the Scottish Bill he could not say
when it would be brought forward again, but he would in.
form the house previous to going into committee on the
English Reform Bill.

for War, the stuuLl)er of regiments or numerical strength
of the garrisons of Hong Kong and Canton, Europeans
and natives of India, not included in the amount of forces
stated by the Secretary of State as proceeding to or ar-
rived in China. He also asked the Secretary to the Ad-
miralty the number of marines and sailors now on the
China stations ?
,Lord C. PAGET said that an answer had already been
given in reference to this subject, to the effect that it would
not be expedient to make the information required public.
As far as he (Lord C. Paget) was concerned, he would be
happy to give the hon. and gallant member in private all
the necessary intelligence he might wish to obtain.
WINE LICENSES, &c., BILL.
Mr. AYRTON asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether he was willing to move that the Refreshment
Houses and Wine Licenses Bill be committed pro forma,
for the purpose of introducing his amendments therein, and
Laving the bill reprinted ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
could not accede to the proposition of the honourable anti
learned member. The debate on this subject had extended
over a long period, and the fact was that there was no
necessity for any material alteration in the bill which had
been submitted to the house originally. The amendments
in no way touched the principle of the bill, and he had al-
ready made an ample explanation on that subject. No
inconvenience would arise from the course the Government
proposed to pursue in reference to this bill.
COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS.
On going into committee of Ways and Means,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUE Et moved the
resolution which he had previously brought forward, in re-
ference to the licensing of houses. With regard to this re-
solution he did not wish to press on hon. members the
adoption of the particular description of house to be taxed
under the bill. The questions which the house wouldhaife
to decide upon would relate to the different places, the
elifferent values, and other circumstances, in
reference to what would constitute a house that
should be properly licensed. The hon. member for
the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) proposed that no house
should bo compelled to take out a license. Hav-
ing referred to the committee appointed to in-
quire into public-houses some years ago, the right
hon. gentleman contended that some of those houses which
did not profess to sell strong liquors did so surreptitiously,
and it was necessaryin many cases the taking out of licenses
should be rendered compulsory.Th e practical operation would
be that such houses would form a symbol to the police,
under whose surveillance they would be placed.
Mr. AYRTON complained that at present the licensing
system proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was
rendered more obscure than it had yet been. In the
first place, they were called on to adopt this system as a
part of the financial scheme of the right hon. gentleman,
but from what he had just stated it appeared that it was
merely a matter of police. The argument as to repressing
the illicit sale of strong drink by the imposition of
licenses would be inoperative. In support of that state-
ment he also adverted to the select committee on public-
houses, and from the evidence adduced before them it
was quite clear that such sale could be repressed
only by the intervention of the police, and could
it be expected that these parties would come forward
and avow the illegal practices in which they were engaged.
It was quite absurd to expect such a course on their part,
and how then could it be supposed that these persons would
not endeavour to evade the payment of a license ? He
also objected to the amounts of the licenses. There was
a further objection, and that was imposing this tax on the
country when its object was only to carry out a matter
of police regulation. That proposition, ho considered,
came with a very bad grace from the right hon. gentle-
man, who, when a Chancellor of the Exchequer iu
expectation, took an opposite course in reference to a similar
subject, and refused to consent to a national charge for
police, which body should be a mere local charge. On
financial grounds, therefore, they were not called on to agree
to this resolution for taxation in reference to these licenses,
and he contended that the operation would be most unjust
on a very large class of the community. For instance—
a number of houses situated in the metropolis
would be obliged to pay this tax, whereas
houses of a similar class in the country would be utterly
exempt from its imposition. He referred particularly to
coffee houses and lodging houses. The hon. and learned
member concluded by moving the omission of the license
tax on refreshment.
After some discussion the house divided on the motion
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which was as follows :
" That, towards raising the supply granted to her Majesty,
there shall be charged, levied, and paid, unto and for the
use of her Majesty, her heirs and successors, for and
upon the several licenses hereinafter mentioned, the
respective rates and duties following, that is to say :
If the house and premises in respect of which such
license shall be granted shall be under the rent and value
of £2O a-year, 10s. 6d.
The numbers were
For the motion
Against
Majority
—7O
On the next clause, that the license should be £1 is on all
refreshment houses rated at £2O and upwards.
Mr. AYR TrINT 41-4. 41_ Le in. ea.
Mr. HARDY thought there could be no reasonable argu-
ment for having two different scales of taxation. As the bill
Row stood it gave power to the police to inspect refreshment
houses, but unless those houses were licensed to sell wine
there was no power of punishment against persons keeping
disorderly houses. He thought that persons keeping disor-
derly houses of this kind ought to be punished in the same
way as persons keeping disorderly public-houses, viz., by
having their license taken away.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
hon. member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) had said
there was a uniform license in most trades. That was so,
bat the inference drawn from it was a very doubtful one.
He thought it would be an extreme hardship on small deal-
ers in teas to pay as much for license as was paid by Fort-
num and Mason ; and therefore he considered there ought
to be some distinction between the large and small dealers.
He did not wish to press for any complicated scale of licen-
ses, and therefore he thought it would be better if the reso-
lution stood as it was.
Lord J. MANNERS thought the argument of the right
hon. gentleman was not strictly applicable to the case before
the house. He thought that substantially no injustice
would be done to the small houses by the proposal of the
hon. member for the Tower Hamlets, but if the Chancellor
of the Exchequer was going to revise the whole system of
licenses, that was an argument for not departing from the
present system.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
mean nor had he said anything about revising the licensing
system. He said the system was a bad one which imposed a
uniform rate upon small and large dealers, and that some
distinction should be made he thought was reasonable.
Mr. Alderman SALOMONS thought this tax would fall
very heavy upon the dealers in the metropolis, and he
trusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer would give way,
and allow the tax to be a uniform one of 10s. 6d.
The committee divided, when the numbers were—
For the clause
Against
The resolution was then agreed to.
On the proposal for every license to be granted as herein-
after mentioned to any licensed keeper of a refreshment house
to sell therein by retail foreign and British wine to be con-
sumed in such house or on the'prernises belonging thereto—
If such house and premises shall be under the rent and
value of £5O a year, £3 3s. And if the same shall be of
the rent or value of £5O a year or upwards, £5 ss.
And for every license to be taken out by any person for
the selling by retail in any shop of foreign wine not to be
consumed in the house or shop or on the premises
where sold :—lf the house and premisessshall be under the
rent or value of £5O, £2 2s. ; and if the same shall be of
the rent or value of £5O a-year or upwards, £3 3s.
Lord J. MANNERS asked whether colonial wines would
be classed under the head of British or foreign wines ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said they
would be classed as foreign wines. (A laugh.)
Mr. AYRTON wished to know whether the Chancellor
of the Exchequer meant to keep up the difference between
licenses granted to wholesale and retail dealers. The license
at present, he believed, was £lO 10s. for persons who dealt
wholesale, and £2 2s. and £3 3s. on retail dealers. Preserv-
ing that difference would not promote the consumption of
unadulterated wine. The difference between the two
ought to bo abolished and one uniform license established.
He had opposed the resolutions purelyfrom a desire to pro.
mote temperance, and he left the regulations for intempe-
rance to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
hon. gentleman had raised a perfectly legitimate question
for discussion. The wholesale dealer was a man who
usually dealt in large quantities of wine, or wished to have
the power of doing so, and he therefore paid ten guineas for
his license. But it would be scarcely fair to charge the
retail dealer, whose shop was open for the sale of other
articles, so large a sum, and he could not see that any prac-
tical inconvenience would arise from maintaining a distinc-
tion. An eight or ten guinea license would press so
heavily upon the retail dealer that he would be required
to dispose of wino some hundreds of pounds in value
before he could realise any profit. If, on the other hAatl,
they were to reduce the ten guinea wine license to five
or six guineas ho was afraid the next step they would be
called upon to take would be to reduce the 10 guinea spirit
license-

Mr. GRIFFITH was not disposed to take a puritanical
view of the question, but ha should like to know the de-
scription of shops likely to be engaged in the retail of wine.
He hardly supposed that there was to be no check upon the
retail of wine, though it did not appear at present that there
was any.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
acted upon the principle that there was no objection to the
wide extension of the sale of wine to be consumed on the
premises ; but regulations would be enforced for preventing
the abuse of the privilego in consuming wine on the premises.
After a few words from Mr. NEWDEGATE, the resolution
was agreed to, as also was a resolution that the license upon
Premises of the rent or value of a° a year or upwards should
be .C 3 3s. per annum.

The house then resumed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE CATAR mid that, if

On clause 1, relating to the duty on licenses,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved an
amendment for the purpose of restricting the sale of wine
not to lse consumed on the premises to wine in bottle only.
The amendment was agreed to, as was an amendment
making the clause applicable to British as well as foreign
wines.
On the next proposition, viz., the amount of the duties to
be granted,
Mr. PALK said it raised the question so much discussed,
viz., that any person keeping a shop for the sale of goods
or commodities might sell wine in bottle, and he wished to
ask whether they would be under the control of the police.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
every person keeping a shop would be entitled to take out
a license for the sale of wine in bottle, and that they would
not be under the control of the police.
After some observations from Mr. WARNER and Mr. B.
W OODD,
Mr. AYRTON said, if this clause remained as it then
stood, no more wholesale licenses would be necessary, for a
retail dealer would be able to sell any quantity, and he, of
course, would tal e out a license of the lower value. This
clause raised an important question, and ho should like to
know what license or authority the right hon. gentleman
intended to r epeal.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
clause had been considered by the leg,l advisers of the Go-
vernment, and they thought the sale of " goods and com-
modities" was clearly defined, and that their was no fear of
their enabling persons to substitute a retail license for a
wholesale license. But he might further observe that the
second clause would prevent such substitution taking place.
He understood that the wholesale dealer had a right to do
everything which was proposed now to be given to the re-
Lull Scaler.
Mr. AYRTON said a distinction must be drawn between
the terms. He believed a wholesale dealer would not be
entitled to sell less than two gallons, and if a man sold less
than one dozen, then ho would be a retailer.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said they
had constituted a license which was to enable a person to
sell wine by retail in general. Then as to what would be a
selling of wine by retail was determined by the second clause.
Mr. AYRTON said he thought a new definition would
be necessary in reference to what persons were or were not
to sell less than two gallons, for as the bill stood every
wholesale dealer would give up his license and be in future
retail dealers.
After a few words fiorn Mr. J. LOCKE to the same effect
Sir S. NO RTHCOTE said the point he wished to ask for
information on was this—any person who kept for sale
"goods and commodities" might sell wine not subject to
the control of the police, but if not, how were they going
to prevent its being consumed on the premises, and being
drunk in the back rooms ?
Mr. W. E WART apprehended the clause was suffi
ciently clear to prevent any evasion, as the parties would
only be entitled to sell in bottles.
Mr. VILLIERS said all the clause did was to enable a
new class of persons to take out wine licenses, and he
thought the ten guinea class and the three guinea would
still be kept distinct. Merchants would be prevented from
selling in bottles. as they were under the present law.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
object of the first clause was to describe the persons who
should be entitled to take out licenses for selling by retail
wine not to be consumed on the premises, and the object of
the second clause was to define the terms "retail and whole-
sale." It appeared to him that it would not be reasonable
that those who kept shops should not be allowed to take out
licenses of this kind, and that being granted he thought it
would be improper to prevent wholesale dealers from hav •
ing the same privilege. If the words "or who shall have
taken out a license as a wholesale dealer in wine" were
added to the words " other than foreign wine," he thought
the clause would meet the views of all hon. gentlemen.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SPOONER asked whether there was anything to
prevent the retail dealer, to whom thoy were about to give
a £3 3s. license, from selling out of his shop to anybody.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
object of the second clause was to prevent that.
Mr. PALK put the case of a large tailor who kept a large
number of hands—working probably on the premises—
what was to prevent him from taking out a license and re-
tailing wine to his workmen ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUE R said there
was nothing to prevent such a man from retailing British
wines:at present in the way described, but he never heard
of the practice.
The amendment, " Other than foreign wine," was then
agreed to.
Upon the amendment containing the words " reputed
quart bottles,"
Mr. AYRTON suggested that the language of what was
called the " Maraschino Act" should be followed in this
clause.

After a conversation in Which Sir S. Northcote, Mr Cross,
Mr. Malins, Alderman Salomons, and Mr. W. Ewart took
part,

Sir S. NORTHCOTE said he felt disposed to take the
sense of the committee against the insertion of these words
altogether. He saw no object for restricting the sale of
wine to moasures of less s ze than quart bottles.
Mr. 'HENLEY said he thought the house had had some
experience of this kind of legislation in the results. The
number of public-houses with licenses for beer " not to
be drunk on the premises" was very great at first, but
they had now almost entirely disappeared. The effect of
legislation was very apparent in the increased number of in-
formations. A man went into one of these houses, and
ordered a glass of beer; it went like lightning down his
throat—(a laugh)—and then his confederate outside watch-
ing the proceeding, went and laid an information before the
magistrates. The same sort of thing would take place with
regard to the toile of wine. But if wine were not to be sold
In less nteasure than quart bottles, this trick would not be
so easy. A m.n might indeed shove the neck of a quart
bottle down his throat, but then he found he could not go
on s) well with it. (A laugh.) He thought the amend-
ment a very good suggestion, and he should support it,
The result mould be, so many informations would bo laid
that this class ofliconses would cease to be taken out.
Sir S. M. PETO said that the number cot licenses for beer
to be drunk on the premises was i 9,915; not to be drunk
on the premises, 2,915. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. E. JAMBS said that the sale of wine in a quart bottle I
would be evidence that there was no intention that it should )
be consumed on the premises. This was a test or line of
demarcation which was necessary to the working of the bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said-he had
listened mith, great interest to this discussion of the bottle
question. (Laughter.) He had come to the conclusion
that the best course would be to make the minimum limit a.
reputed pint. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. AYRTON said-he /14 hould stand upon the quart.
(4 laugh.) Any one might -go to one of these licensed