HC Deb 04 June 1830 vol 24 cc1398-400

On the question that the House do resolve itself into a Committee on the Sale of Beer Bill,

Mr. Bright

objected to proceeding further with the present measure till the nature of that for effecting an alteration in the system of Excise, which was connected with it, should be before the House. He called upon Ministers to say precisely what that measure was, and to what extent it would take off the burthen of the Excise.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

objected to entering into a discussion of one measure, at a time when another measure was before the House. When the present Bill should have been disposed of, he would go into the other, and afford his hon. friend an opportunity of discussing it.

Sir M. W. Ridley

asked, whether the public-houses now in existence, and licensed according to the present system, were to be put under the direction of the Excise in the same manner as was provided with respect to the new houses to be opened under the authority of this Act?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, the law would be, that those who sold Beer only as provided by the Bill, should be licensed by the Excise; and that those who combined with the Beer-trade a trade in Wine and Spirits should continue to be licensed as at present.

Mr. Brougham

said, it appeared to him that those who had the spirit-licences would thereby possess such a preference as would give them a very fair chance, he might almost say a certainty, of keeping their ground.

The House went into Committee.

On the clause being read, restricting the brewers of Porter and Ale from using any other material in the process of brewing than malt, hops, and water,

Mr. Bright

proposed, as an Amendment, that individuals should not be thus restricted. As the Chancellor of the Ex- chequer had introduced this as a free-trade measure, he thought it was but fair, looking to the right hon. Gentleman's argument, that persons in the trade should be allowed to brew from whatever ingredients they pleased. Of course, as the right hon. Gentleman had said, the public would very soon discover where the bad Beer and where the good Beer was sold. Therefore no ill effects were likely to arise from leaving the matter completely open.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

observed, that the great object of the Bill was to supply the public with a wholesome and nutritious malt beverage; and it was evident that that object would be defeated, if individuals were allowed to concoct liquor from quassia, coculus indicus, and other deleterious drugs.

The Amendment negatived without a division.

Sir T. Freemantle

proposed a clause to enact that any person applying under the Act for a license, should give a notice to be put up for three successive Sundays on the church-door, containing his name and address; and that it should be lawful for any three rated parishioners to apply to a magistrate, and give security to enter an appeal against the granting of the license; and that the magistrates should not be authorized to grant the license if the applicant had been convicted of a felony, or was a man of notoriously bad character, or if the place where the public-house was to be kept was 100 yards from any public road.

The Committee divided: For the clause 42; Against it 72—Majority 30.