THIRD READING. (Hansard, 20 August 1881)

§ MR. WARTON
(speaking from the place usually occupied by the Leader of the Opposition) said, he begged to move, as an Amendment, to leave out from the words "Bill be" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "recommitted in respect of Clause 1." His object was to propose that the borough of Cardiff should be exempted from the provisions of the Bill. He had taken great pains to ascertain the opinions of the people in that large and prosperous seaport, and from all that he could learn he was in a condition to contend that the feeling of the population there was against the Bill, and that the signatures to the Petition from Cardiff in favour of it wore improperly obtained. The Petition was signed by a large number of women and young children, and among the signatories were twins who, at the age of seven, had expressed their opinion as to the necessity of Sunday closing. Again, a number of fictitious streets had been inserted as addresses of the people signing, and many persons had had their names signed without their knowledge. With regard to the necessity of the Bill for Cardiff, he found that in the five months from the 1st of January to the 9th of May the whole number of persons charged with drunkenness was only 133, and of that number only three were drunk on the Sunday. These figures for such a mixed and floating population were of a remarkable character, and justified him in saying that there was no necessity for any change in the law. Under these circumstances, he moved the re-commitment of the Bill.

MR. GLADSTONE
I rise, Sir, for the purpose of opposing the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition. I am quite sensible of the weight that attaches to the new position the hon. and learned Gentleman has attained after a short Parliamentary career. I oppose the Motion on these grounds. First, that the hon. and learned Member has had a full opportunity, and a more favourable opportunity than he has had this evening, in a much fuller House, to set forth the whole of his argument to show why Cardiff should be excluded from the Bill; but he has not only had that opportunity, but the House did consider the question and decided when its numbers were three times more than we have now present. On the 15th of June, a Motion having the same object was debated, and a division was taken, and the Motion was rejected by 118 to 27. I submit that we ought not, with our reduced numbers and in the exhausted condition of the House, even under the increased, the enhanced authority that the hon. and learned Member has acquired with his new position, to endeavour to revoke a decision that carried with it much greater weight than any we could now arrive at. We have had experience in Ireland of such exceptions in regard to this subject. In the Sunday Closing Bill for Ireland it was granted, for the sake of passing the Bill rather than on the convictions of the party making the concession, that certain of the large towns in Ireland should be excluded from the Bill. But now I understand Irish opinion, after the experience there has been, is altogether unfavourable to a continuance of these exclusions, and when the temporary measure that was passed for Ireland comes to be renewed, undoubtedly Parliament will be asked to put an end to these exclusions, and to pass a Bill for the whole of Ireland. I am sorry to observe the hon. and learned Gentleman relapse. [Mr. WARTON had retired to his usual seat on the Fourth Bench.] I am sorry if anything I may have said has had the effect of checking the noble aspirations of his mind. [Mr. 602 WARTON: Oh, no!] The hon. and learned Gentleman, I think, admitted that in Wales generally there is a disposition, a feeling widely spread in favour of passing this Bill. I was sorry to hear in one part of his speech a reference to Nonconformist chapels in Wales, which took the nature, I hardly like to call it of a sneer, but he did not treat with cordial respect those voluntary efforts of the people to provide themselves with a ministry, when the grossest abuses prevailed in the Church, to which they are entitled. But, Sir, the exclusion of a town of this kind causes an anomaly of the most inconvenient kind; and I do not think we should be justified in such an exclusion. It is true that the hon. and learned Gentleman has told us that he had made discoveries, or has had them made, in reference to the signatures to a Petition in favour of the Bill from Cardiff; but then the other Petition that he has quoted has not been made the subject of a critical examination, or possibly very interesting discoveries might be made in reference to that Petition. It is a good thing, no doubt, to have regard to the public opinion of a country like Wales; but I cannot say that it is desirable to carry that principle down to its minutest ramifications, and examine into the public opinion of each spot in Wales. I do not admit his statement as regards Cardiff; but, if it is true, it is extremely doubtful whether we can rely on it for such a proposition as this. We have had a much more authoritative adjudication upon the question than we can have now, and I hope that on this account, if for no other reason, the House will agree we should not upset the judgment which has been passed.

§ SIR HARDINGE GIFFARD
said, he would support the Amendment for the re-committal of the Bill, more by way of protest against the manner in which the Bill had been pushed on through its stages than with any hope of reversing the former decision of the House. Considering the imperceptible line that separated England from Wales, he thought it very impolitic to make special laws for the Principality. He had on a previous occasion expressed his conviction that the Bill was undesirable, and especially for the large towns such as Cardiff. The inconvenience would be very great indeed to some people. He 603 did not deny that there was a strong opinion in its favour, but it was among the classes which did not use the public-houses. He had himself been the guest of a family where he found everyone had signed Petitions in favour of the Bill; but he asked how much it would affect their comfort, and they answered not in any way. They had their own supply of beer. It appeared to him extremely undesirable to legislate as they were doing now. He was sorry that he did not see the hon. Member for Leicester (Mr. P. A. Taylor) there, who described the supporters of these measures as "the virtuous party"—a party who professed a virtuous desire to interfere with the habits of other people when they did not cause the smallest inconvenience to themselves. He would vote for the Amendment by way of protest, and he hoped that in "another place" the way in which the Bill had been dealt with at 11 o'clock on Saturday night, at a Sitting intended for Supply, would be fully taken into consideration; for he was sure that if the Bill had been exhaustively discussed, it would not have commended itself to the judgment of the House of Commons.