THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON did not think that the suggested alteration would be an acceptable one in Ireland. In England the hours were regulated in reference to Divine Service, whereas in Ireland Divine Service was celebrated at different hours. As far as he was informed, those hours would be most inconvenient. they were closed as in England, the polled that the result would be in favour labourers would go to their homes. of the Amendment. He could speak for his district. No more carefullyguarded clause than this could be drawn, and he trusted that no one would vote against it for fear of introducing the permissive principle. Let them legislate for this part of the United Kingdom as it desired; and who could doubt that, if this matter were to be decided across the Channel, the permissive principle in this respect would be adopted. The demand made by his hon. Friend was very moderate. He simply proposed that the licensing authorities, after due notice had been given, and every opportunity had been afforded to the people of the district to express their views, might, if they found it was in accordance with the wish of the inhabitants, close publichouses on Sunday. It was not fair to say that this could be done now if the publicans desired it. They had no right to submit the virtue of those who desired to do it to the vicious wishes of an individual. In one district four out of five publicans might desire to close on Sunday; but it was not fair to put them in the position of losing half their trade if the fifth did not join. The proposal of his hon. Friend was guarded by requiring that two-thirds of the magistrates should be of one mode of thinking before this restriction could come into operation. MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING said, he was in accord with the hon. Baronet the Member for Dublin, and he had an Amendment to move-namely, that additional power should be given to magistrates in granting licenses at Quarter Sessions in Ireland. The magistrates there held their sessions four times a-year; and, while he desired to give them increased power, he was not favourable to give the power to a majority of the magistrates. His opinion was that two-thirds of them might be entrusted with power and control. He would therefore move an Amendment to the proposed new clause as follows: -After the word "night," in line 10, to insert the words "Provided always, That it shall be lawful for the justices assembled in quarter sessions for any district of any county or riding, to make an order or orders directing that all houses and premises within such district, or within any portion thereof specially designated in such order, which are licensed for the sale by retail of intoxicating liquors shall be closed on Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, and every day appointed for a public fast or thanksgiving, at an earlier hour, or during the whole of such days; and they may also by such order direct all such houses and premises to be closed one hour earlier on the other days of the week." The great advantage of such a law was that it would spread throughout the country; and he desired that a discretionary power should be given to the magistrates, on an application of the majority of the inhabitants of any parish that all public-houses should be closed throughout the whole of Sunday; that two-thirds of them shall so direct, if they think proper, after hearing every person for and against such application. Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted." MR. MITCHELL HENRY hoped the Government would accept the Amendment of his hon. Friend. There could not be a doubt that a large number of people in Ireland wished for such a law, and he believed if the country were He earnestly hoped the Government would accept the Amend ment. MR. PIM thought the Amendment would be a most satisfactory mode of dealing with the question. SIR DOMINIC CORRIGAN said, he would accept the Amendment, in lieu of his own, with great gratification. MR. MURPHY said, it appeared to him that this proposition was only the permissive question in another shape. The object which the hon. Member had in view would be much better accomplished by the voluntary action of those who kept public-houses than by the Amendment which he proposed. What would be the effect of the proposition? It would cause canvassing and strife in every parish. Twenty-one days' notice must be given before any action could be taken. But on whose behalf and for what object was that notice to be given? Was it not that the ratepayers and consumers should have notice of the proposition? and it would not be difficult to foresee that in that district they would have all the excitement of a contested election. in favour of penal legislation of this [An hon. MEMBER: The magistrates are kind. He was convinced that the manot elected.] The object of the notice jority of the people of Ireland, like the was that the magistrates should be in- majority of the people of England, were formed by the inhabitants of the district against curtailing the luxuries of the what was their will and pleasure upon poor. this subject. [Mr. M'CARTHY DOWNING said, that this was not the case.] What, then, was the object of the notice? Would not everyone who was against Sunday closing be up in arms against those who were in its favour, and would not that give rise to canvassing and internecine strife in the whole of the district? He contended, also, that the Amendment would be unfair to the occupiers of the public-houses, because it would render their tenure insecure. There would be continual agitation for and against Sunday closing; there would be no finality in any rule that was adopted, and the question would give rise to vexatious strife. DR. BALL said, there was a good deal to be said in favour of the proposition of the hon. Member for the county of Cork; but he doubted if it should be adopted when there were so few of the Irish Representatives present. He was the only Irish Member left on his side of the House. He would suggest that the proposition should be considered by the Government between that and the Report; but he did not think that there was a sufficient number of Irish Members present to decide a question which involved principles of such importance. MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING said, his hon. Friend the Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Murphy) had fallen into entire delusion and misapprehension. He did not know what he meant by saying that there would be canvassing. Would the magistrates at Quarter Sessions be canvassed? [Mr. MURPHY: The public opinion of the district will be canvassed.] Public opinion would, no doubt, be brought to bear on the magistrates, and it would be for the magistrates to consider how far they would be guided by that opinion. He had thought that he would not take a division on this question; but he found the opinion of hon. Members around him so strong that he should set aside that resolution, and take the sense of the House upon the question. MR. O'REILLY-DEASE said, hon. Members were much mistaken in supposing that the people of Ireland were That THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, that the proposal of his hon. Friend consisted of two parts one to give magistrates the absolute power of closing public-houses on Sunday, and the other a power of curtailing the hours on other days. With regard to the absolute closing of public-houses on Sunday, that was not a principle or mode of legislation which he admired, for he thought that as far as possible Parliament ought to decide on these matters, and that they ought not to be left to the local authorities. There was, of course, a great difference between town and country; but the House was aware of that dif ference, and it could make one set of regulations for the town, and another set for the country. There was great force in the objection which had been raised by the hon. Member for the City of Cork, and if the proposal were adopted there would no doubt be an active canvass, with the view of eliciting the feelings of the inhabitants on the one side or the other; and that agitation might be renewed every three months. was a prospect upon which he looked with no satisfaction at all. It would be an abandonment of the public functions if they placed such extensive powers as these in the hands of magistrates. It further appeared to him that this was something like the permissive principle without some of its advantages, for there was this advantage in favour of the permissive principle-that they did obtain, in some sense, the opinion of the majority of the ratepayers, whereas, by the proposal of the hon. Member, they would not have that advantage. Then, again, the magistrates to whom the power was to be granted might be all of one opinion, and that was that public-houses should be closed entirely; and if they were so minded they would be able to carry it out, irrespective of the opinion of the ratepayers, whether in a minority or a majority outside. He hoped that he should not be supposed to say anything derogatory of the character of the magistrates of Ireland, who, as a body, he believed, would not shrink in any case in doing their duty as between man and man; but that was a different question, and in dealing with such points as would be brought before them, if the Motion of his hon. Friend were agreed to, they would have to deal with opinions, not with facts. If they had strong opinions one way and decided accordingly, the thing would be done past the probability of recall, and great discontent might be thereby created among the population at large. He must say, therefore, that he could not vote for the proposal to give the magistrates the power, under the proposed conditions, of closing public-houses entirely on Sundays. He preferred to leave the regulation as it stood in the Bill. With respect to the optional and elastic power of varying the hours of opening and closing on week-days, he must say that he could not find that there had been any general expression of public feeling in favour of such a course being adopted in Ireland. He thought that what had induced his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to adopt the elastic principle for England was, that the people in the different towns and districts lived under such widely diverse circumstances; their habits and local wants were so different that it was necessary to make, as it were, a selfacting machine adapted to meet these different local wants. But as regarded Ireland, which was a more purely agricultural country, and where there was not the same diversity of local and social habits and wants, there was no need for ensuring the same elasticity. What he should propose was that on Sundays, in towns having 5,000 inhabitants and over, the public-houses should be open from 2 o'clock till 9, and on week-days from 7 to 11 o'clock; under that population, from 7 until 10. If he saw, before the Report was brought up, any strong reasons to alter those views, he should be happy to give them his best consideration. Meantime, he hoped his hon. Friend would withdraw the Amend ment. MR. MAGUIRE said, he wished to thank the Government for what they had done in the Bill, which he thought would greatly promote the cause of temperance in Ireland, and produce a great improvement on Sundays. As to closing the houses entirely on that day, he was sure that public opinion would be entirely against it in his part of the country, and he for one did not believe that there was any such desire on the part of the great majority of the people. Certainly he should not vote for such a measure unless such an opinion existed in its favour. He would suggest, however, to the noble Lord whether it would not be an improvement if the public-houses could be closed in towns earlier than 11 o'clock on Saturday nights. The younger portion of the working classes, with their week's wages in their pockets, were tempted into excesses by the houses being kept open late. He would not propose to close so early as 9, but he would suggest that 10 o'clock would be a fair hour for closing on Saturday, and believed that if that were done it would be of great benefit to the working classes and to the cause of morality. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. DowSE) said, the practical objection to the clause of the hon. Member was that it would be absolutely unworkable. Its phraseology would require no end of interpretations and definitions. It would cause a grand fieldday every three months at Quarter Sessions, preceded by a general agitation throughout the division of each county, and he believed even the hon. Member for Carlisle would hardly like to place himself at the mercy of some 50 irate publicans dragged in that manner from their business and their homes. Besides that, who was to pay the clerks of the peace their fees for all this additional work? Who was to pay for the advertisements in the county papers? Who was to find the means for setting in motion a complicated and unworkable machinery? He strongly advised the withdrawal of the Amendment. MR. MITCHELL HENRY said, the only objections urged by the right hon. and learned Gentleman were legal objections, not based upon principle. If he chose to do so, he might amend the clause in such a way as to obviate his own objections on the bringing up of the Report. The Attorney General for Ireland had stated that the proposed clause would prove unworkable. Now, if the right hon. and learned Gentleman would undertake to produce on the Report some clause similar in principle which would work, he should recommend his hon. Friend (Mr. Downing) to withdraw his Amendment. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. DowsE) said, he was entirely opposed to the principle of the clause. So was his noble Friend (the Marquess of Hartington). MR. MURPHY, on the ground that no opportunity had been afforded the trade in Ireland of expressing their views on the subject, said, he must oppose the clause. MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING maintained, in opposition to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, that his clause was perfectly workable. Question put. The Committee divided: Ayes 25; Noes 50 Majority 25. Clause agreed to, and added to the Bill. New Clause (Interpretation-"spirit grocer," "Excise license," &c.) amended, agreed to, and added to the Bill. New Clause (No renewal of a license to be granted to spirit grocers without certificate of justices). MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING moved as an Amendment, that no renewal of a license should be granted, unless the spirit grocer produced a certificate from two or more justices who usually preside at the nearest sessions. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland knew that in many places only one magistrate presided, and he believed his Amendment would remedy that inconvenience. Amendment agreed to. New Clause (Repeated convictions) agreed to, and added to the Bill. preceding clauses, said that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) would find on inquiry of the Irish Members that they were in favour of diminishing the hours of sale on Sundays, and he hoped he would bear that in mind before the Report. MR. MAGUIRE, in reference to the THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, there was no question before the Committee, and therefore he could not make a speech; but he would promise his hon. Friend that the matter should receive his attention before the Report was considered. MR. RATHBONE moved a new clause to follow Clause 13-(Evidence may be given as to previous offences). The object of the clause was to remedy the difficulty of obtaining convictions for permitting That difficulty was great that there were many towns in which there was not a single conviction during a whole year. drunkenness. SO MR. BRUCE said, he would accept the clause, for he thought it was founded on a just principle. When evidence was given that drunkenness was continually taking place, it was equivalent to proving that it was knowingly permitted. It was, in fact, the same principle as was ap Clause, as amended, agreed to, and plied to the passing of bad coin. added to the Bill. New Clauses (Penalty on spirit grocer if liquor drunk on premises); (Evasion of law as to drinking on premises of spirit grocer); (Internal communication between premises of spirit grocer and house of public resort), agreed to, and Clause agreed to, and added to the Bill. SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON said, he should not move the Amendments of which he had given Notice under the head of "Grant of orders of occasional exemptions;" nor that in Clause 30, which dealt with the question of appeal. The present appeal, as the moval or the transfer of a license, was to House was aware, whether as to the re Quarter Sessions. He believed that the idea thrown out by the Government of creating a new licensing committee would have led to the formation of a valuable Court for dealing with appeals of that kind also, and had it been earlier in the Session he should have endeavoured to press the subject on the House; but under present circumstances he should not do so, as he would be very unwilling at so very late a period to entertain any new scheme with reference to appeals. He should, however, move according to Notice, the insertion of a new clause after Clause 40, providing If not situate in any such town as above mentioned twenty pounds per annum, or if a beerhouse or eating-house licence only is attached twelve pounds per annum. (B.) The premises shall be, in the opinion of the licensing authority, structurally adapted to the class of licence for which a certificate is sought; Provided that no house, not licenced as a public-house or beerhouse at the time of the passing of this Act, shall be qualified to have a public-house or beerhouse licence attached thereto, unless such house shall contain, exclusive of the rooms occupied by the inmates of such house, if a public-house two rooms, and if a beerhouse one room, for the accommodation of the public, each of such rooms to be not less than nine feet in height, to contain not less than one thousand five hundred cubic feet, and to be so constructed as to freely admit light and air; and no new house licensed as a public-house or beerhouse shall be qualified to have a licence for sale off the premises attached thereto, unless such house shall have a separate entrance and separate accommodation for the purchasers of intoxicating liquor to be consumed off the premises: And no house shall be qualified to have a public-house or beerhouse licence attached thereto, if any part thereof or of any premises communicating therewith is used as a common lodging-house,)—(Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbet that premises to be licensed must be of! the following rateable value-namely, if in a town containing a population of not less than 100,000 inhabitants, £50 per annum, or for a beerhouse or eating-house license only £30 per annum; if in a town containing 10,000 inhabitants, £40 per annum, and for a beerhouse or eating-house license £25 per annum; if not in any town as abovementioned £20 per annum, or for a beerhouse or eating-house license £12 per annum. He should also supplement the proposed new clause by providing regulations as to the structural fitness of the premises. He had evidence from almost all the large and populous districts of the country as to the rateable value of the houses in them; and the figures in the clause he proposed he thought would be found fairly to represent the value of houses employed in the trade throughout the country. At the same time, he was not prepared to adhere to the figures if the right hon. Gentleman felt that in any instance they were seriously too high. He believed they would work fairly. He attached great importance to the raising of the qualification of houses, for in their value was to be found a guarantee for their regular conduct and the maintenance of order in MR. BRUCE said, the principle of them. One of his reasons for raising the clause had been already adopted in the qualification from £8 to £12 in rural regard to beerhouses, but the figures it districts was that that was the qualifica- comprised were too high. The hon. Bation necessary for a vote in Parliamen-ronet proposed that there should be no tary elections. It would be generally found that the value of public-houses was higher than that of beerhouses, and that where the rateable value of the latter was £10 the rateable value of the former was £15 or £20. He moved the insertion of the clause. New Clause (Qualification of house.) (A.) The premises, unless such premises are annum, or if a beerhouse or eating-house licence only is attached twenty-five son,) -brought up, and read the first time. licensed victualler in any part of the country unless he occupied a house of the rateable value of £20. [Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: No new one.] That would practically prevent the establishment of public-houses in rural districts. Small populations were springing up here and there, and the Return made in 1867 showed that there were some 30,000 public-houses under the rateable value of £15 a-year. He would undertake to say that they were by no means the worst-conducted houses in the country. They were village public-houses, decent and well-conducted places, against which no complaint could justly be made. Why should such houses be excluded from our rural districts? What he had endeavoured to do by this Bill was to secure good and responsible persons for the management of these houses, who would act under a sense of duty and with a regard to the public interests. The scale of his hon. Friend was really too severe. |