"Except in cases where the offence charged is Amendment, in order to make room for that of being found drunk in any highway or other the substitute which the Home Secretary public place, whether a building or not, or on any licensed premises, or of being guilty while drunk was about to propose, in the shape of a of riotous or disorderly conduct, or of being drunk separate paragraph. Practically, that while in charge on any highway or other public new Proviso would somewhat weaken place of any carriage, horse, cattle, or steam- the provision which he carried the other engine, or of being drunk when in possession of evening; but it would give effect to much that his clause contemplated.

loaded firearms."

SIR ROBERT TORRENS moved the omission of the word "loaded," as being calculated to render people less careful than they would be if the carriage of all firearms was prohibited. Many persons discharged firearms under the idea that they were not loaded, when in fact they

were.

tived.

to.

Amendment (Mr. Winterbotham) agreed

was

MR. AUBERON HERBERT glad the hon. Baronet had approved the Amendment; but whilst he was in favour of the Amendment of the Government, he intended to move the omission of the clause, because no case had been made out for changing the position of the grocers. Legislation of this kind was Amendment (Sir Robert Torrens) nega-free trade. The limitation of the grocers' opposed to facts and the principles of business would have the effect of driving many people to public-houses to get what they wanted. They had heard a good deal about wives going to grocers' shops and drinking there, but was the House going to undertake the management of other people's wives? If so, where would they stop? There were a great many other things besides drinking which wives did without the consent of their husbands. Legislation of this character, altogether independent of the facts, might be called legislation in a balloon.

MR. RYLANDS said, that before the clause was finally agreed to, he thought there should be some restriction upon the relations held by the licensing justices to the owners or occupiers of public-house property. Acting upon a suggestion which had been made to him upon the subject, he would move the insertion, in line 30, of the words "the father, son, or brother."

Amendment proposed,

In page 31, line 30, after the word “occupier,” to insert the words "or the father, son, or brother of such occupier.”—(Mr. Rylands.)

Amendment agreed to; words struck out accordingly.

On the Motion of Mr. BRUCE, the Question, "That those words be there following paragraph was added to the inserted," put, and negatived.

or

On the Motion of Mr. A. JOHNSTON, in line 28, after "this Act," the words under any of the Intoxicating Liquors (Licensing) Acts" inserted.

Clause, as amended, agreed to. Clause 67 (Regulations as to retail licenses of wholesale dealers).

MR. BRUCE moved the omission from the clause of the following paragraph:"Every person selling by retail spirits in contravention of this section shall be deemed to have sold the same without being duly licensed. Every person holding a license under this section from the licensing justices shall be subject to the same regulations as to hours of closing and police supervision as persons holding a retail license under the sections of thirty-second and thirtythird Victoria, chapter twenty-seven, and the Acts amending the same."

SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON said, he was prepared to accept the

clause: :

"A license for the sale of liqueurs or spirits by retail not to be consumed on the premises may, where such license is required by this Act, be granted in the same manner in all respects in which a license for selling wine not to be consumed on the premises may by law be granted, and an application for such a license shall not be refused except upon one or more of the grounds on which a certificate in respect of a license to sell by retail beer, cider, or wine not to be consumed on the premises may be refused: Provided, That in respect of any such license for liqueurs or spirits to be granted at any general annual licensing meeting, or adjournment thereof, held between the twentieth of August and the end of September, one thousand eight hundred and seventy two, such notices only shall be required to be given, not exceeding seven days' notice, as may be prescribed by the licensing justices."

On the Motion of Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, Amendment made, providing that nothing in the clause should affect Excise licenses granted before the passing of the Act, so long as they should be in force,

MR. M. A. BASS observed that the water used in brewing often contained rather large quantities of salt. In the Burton waters the quantity of salt present amounted to 40 grains per gallon, and in the London waters it was still greater.

MR. BRUCE observed that it would, under the proposed Amendment, be always necessary to prove that salt had been added to the beer.

MR. CAWLEY, in reference to the proposed Amendment, pointed out that the offences to which the 21st and the 23rd clauses related were entirely different. Keeping and selling what had been adulterated was not the same as actually adulterating.

MR. WATNEY thought that there ought to be some limit stated in the clause.

day, moved that the Bill be now read a third time.

He

SIR WILFRID LAWSON said, he did not wish to detain the House longer than was necessary; but he did not think it was right that a Bill of that importance should be allowed to go from them without a parting word. He wished to see how far they had dealt with this question in a comprehensive spirit, and how far this Bill might be considered a settlement of the question. They were all, or nearly all, agreed that the trade should be regulated. thought until that day that the junior hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Fawcett) was the only man in the House who believed in free trade in drink, but he supposed that after the speech of the hon. Member for Nottingham (Mr. Auberon Herbert), he must admit that there were two. The only object of this Bill was to limit and curtail the consumption of intoxicating drink. ["No, no!"] Well, he would say that its object was to make those who drank too much drink less, and those who drank too little drink what was not used by those who had hitherto drunk too much. What had they done? They had decided that there should be a heavier penalty for drunkenness. That might be right, or it might be wrong; but his legal Friends in the House knew that when they increased the penalty they increased the danger of not getting a conviction, and he thought that would be found to be the case with regard to drunkenness, which was not regarded by many people as a very serious offence. The effect of the increased penalty would be felt by the drunkard's family, more of whom would be made beggars by it. He was happy to say that the Bill proMR. WATNEY asked how if they posed a heavier penalty for the drunkardfound salt in it, anyone could tell whe-maker; but there would always be an ther it had been mixed or not?

MR. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH observed that there was no reference to the Schedule in Clause 23, and whether they made the Amendment or not, an excess of salt in beer would be condemned by the Bill. He trusted the House would not sanction the selling of beer containing a large amount of salt.

MR. BRUCE thought the objection a sound one as regarded the 21st clause. The words "the possession of which he could not account for," seemed to him sufficient to meet all reasonable objections.

MR. WETHERED said, this was a very important matter. As the clause now stood, a man would be liable if salt was found in the beer.

MR. WINTERBOTHAM said, he would only be liable if the beer was adulterated with salt-that is, if it was mixed with it.

MR. BRUCE said, it was known that salt was universally found in beer; and therefore they must prove that there was something more than that to secure a conviction.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
House resumed.

Bill reported; as amended, considered.
MR. BRUCE, in accordance with the
Notice which had been given the previous

increased difficulty in obtaining convictions in consequence of the heavier penalty. The Morning Advertiser said

"We have, it is true, heard it said that the present state of the law is severe enough for the purposes of annoyance and persecution, were it universally or even commonly carried out to the letter, or harshly interpreted. It is not so carried out,' say some; and in like manner the new Bill will not be stringently enforced.' We sincerely trust that it will not be, and that those who talk in this strain are right in their view of the matter."

The House would see that there was great danger of the Bill not being carried out. Another object which the Bill

sought to effect was to impose penalties | facility of drinking. A Friend of his on adulterations. If the House would own had reminded him that he had been look into the last Report of the Govern- in the habit of saying that £100,000,000 ment Analyst, they would find that there were yearly squandered on intoxication; were very few cases of adulteration by but if things went on as they were deleterious ingredients; and there was going, he might raise the estimate to no greater delusion than to suppose that £150,000,000 per annum. Now, it apdrunkenness arose from adulteration. peared to him an awful thing that all The real advantage and benefit of this that prosperity should be perverted into Bill was, that the Home Secretary had the ruin of the people, instead of tending succeeded in providing that public-houses to their prosperity and advancement; should be open during shorter hours. for he believed that if inquiries were inThat principle was not carried so far as stituted it would be found that the wives he could wish, but he thanked his right of the labouring classes were now worse hon. Friend for having carried it so far off than when their husbands earned less as he had done. The right hon. Gentle- than they did at present-so that, in fact, man had given permissive powers; but all the money which ought to go to prohe had given them to the magistrates, mote the happiness of families went to who did not altogether understand the swell the pockets of the brewers. It wants of the people. The great defect seemed to him that the House itself had of this Bill was that it did very little to become an agency in their hands to endiminish the number of public-houses. able them to carry on their system of gain. That was what the country wanted- He hoped, however, that there was spirit what had been demanded in Petitions enough yet left in the House of Comand public meetings, and that was what mons to raise them beyond that posithis Bill did very little to give them. It tion; and there were not, he believed, was said that these houses were wanted half-a-dozen Members who would venby the working men. The other day ture to say this measure was more than what was called a "workmen's city" was the settlement of the question for a day. inaugurated by Lord Shaftesbury, and They had for the moment made vested one of the rules established in it was that interest paramount to the public intethere were to be no public-houses. Not rest. He gave the House the credit for only did the Bill not provide for the a desire to effect a different settlement, diminution of public-houses, but he rather but he had been overborne in the matter. thought that there were some of the Still he knew that the question was not clauses which would make it easier to get a settled, and the House itself, which had license than formerly. With regard to the during the Session done so much for the licensing authority, the magistrates had general benefit of the community, felt for generations exercised that authority; that in this matter it had not done and the result of that was that drunken- enough. He hoped, however, that the ness was so prevalent that they had to Prime Minister would take it up, for he pass this Licensing Bill. The real evil believed he had never yet looked into it was, that the licensing authority was fully so as to appreciate its great moral not elected by nor related to the people. and social importance. The fact was, that this was not a Licens- mised them for next year a measure in ing Bill, but a Police Bill. Another regard to local taxation, and he had no fact to which he wished to direct the at- doubt it would prove a large and comtention of the House was, that Scotland prehensive measure; but unless he dealt was altogether left out of the Bill, so with this question, which was the origin that absolutely they had not done any- of so much of the burdens which the thing for their Scotch brethren. Every- people had to bear, he would be only one, then, must see that the arrangement shifting the burden, and not doing away could not stand where it was. The with it. He repeated, then, that the people of this country were now in a question was not settled, and that it state of unexampled prosperity-wages was only adjourned from the House to were higher than they had ever been, la- the constituencies; and now that they bour was more plentiful, and money more for the first time were free and unbiassed abundant. The wages were higher, in the exercise of the franchise and could and there were shorter hours of labour, elect a House of their own, they would but those advantages only increased the use the power which the Legislature had

He had pro

conferred on them to remedy this great | was that when the House of Commons evil for their own good, and to advance got another Bill of this sort to consider, the cause of temperance reform, which, they would not be under the necessity of according to the late Mr. Cobden, lay at hurrying through the business in the the foundation of all moral and social way they had been forced to do in disimprovement. posing of this measure. If they had to do that, it would be better that the Parliament should do away altogether with the Standing Orders and Rules of Parliament. He did not think the measure would do much good, but he was heartily glad to get rid of it.

MR. BRUCE said, he would not follow the hon. Baronet into a general review of the measure. The hon. Baronet was one of those who were of opinion that in order to put down drunkenness they should have recourse to prohibition; but laws of prohibition have been tried in the New England States, and had signally failed. The hon. Baronet said they would still have drunkenness after the passing of this measure-and no doubt they would, so long as the people were not sensible of the evil consequences which it entailed; but he trusted that the measures which, during the last two Sessions, Parliament had passed for their social amelioration would do more than any prohibitory legislation, however stringent, could be expected to effect, as they would then set up for themselves a higher standard of morality. The hon. Baronet complained that Scotland was not included in the Bill; but he was the last person who ought to complain of that, as the effect of it would have been to extend the hours in Scotland, whereas at present the limitation in respect to them was more stringent than that proposed in this Bill. The country at large was too sensible to suppose that the evil of excessive drinking could be cured by this or by any other legislative measure. Parliament would have done enough by throwing every impediment it could in the way of drunkenness; and this measure, moderate as it was, would accomplish much good, though it might not eradicate drunkenness altogether.

MR. HENLEY thought it would be a blessed thing to get rid of this Bill on any terms, although he regarded it as a most inconsistent piece of legislation; because while it showed the utmost distrust of the licensing authorities in the matter of granting licenses, it gave them almost unlimited discretion over the much more delicate and important matter of regulating the hours of closing. Doubtless, in future we should have in every licensing district the most furious battles between the saints and the sinners as to what hours public-houses should be closed or opened. All he hoped

MR. MURPHY, on the part of the licensed victuallers of Ireland, thanked Parliament for passing the measure, which was universally acceptable to them, as they had no other desire than to carry on their business in a respectable manner, and to eliminate from it everything that was exceptional.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

HOMICIDE LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
On Motion of Mr. RUSSELL GURNEY, Bill to

consolidate and amend the Law relating to Homi-
cide, ordered to be brought in by Mr. RUSSELL
GURNEY and Mr. JAMES.

Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 289.]

House adjourned at five minutes before Six o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Thursday, 8th August, 1872.

MINUTES.-PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading-
Consolidated Fund (Appropriation)*.
Second Reading-Committee negatived-Expiring
Laws Continuance* (293); Union Officers (Ire-
land) Superannuation * (294).

Third Reading-Pawnbrokers* (292); Attorneys
and Solicitors Act (1860) Amendment (285);
Income Tax Collection, Public Departments
(No. 2)* (283); Turnpike Acts Continuance,
&c. (282); Pensions Commutation Act (1871)
Extension (284); Revising Barristers * (289),
and passed.

#

INTOXICATING LIQUOR (LICENSING)

BILL.

COMMONS' AMENDMENTS. Commons' Amendments considered (according to Order).

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY said, ERLE that the Amendments made by the Com