HL Deb 07 August 1871 vol 208 cc948-51

House in Committee (according to Order).

Clause 1 (Restriction on grant of new licences).

EARL BEAUCHAMP

proposed the introduction of words, the effect of which would be to place the licensed victuallers and the grocers who retailed spirits on an equal footing. The noble Earl said, as he understood the policy of Parliament during the present Session, it was that no new licences of any kind should be granted. Great injustice would be inflicted on the large and respectable trade of licensed victuallers if the Bill was passed in its present form.

Amendment moved, in page 1, line 18, after ("1869") insert ("or under the 24 and 25 Vict. c. 21.")—(The Earl Beauchamp.)

THE EARL OF MORLEY

objected to the Amendment as an infringement of the privileges of the other House, and also as irrelevant, licences granted by the Excise not being touched by the Bill.

THE MARQUESS OF RIPON

said, that this was really a Money Bill.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

admitted that, as far as the granting of licences was a money question, the House could not deal with it, but urged that in its moral aspect their Lordships were able to do so. Two years ago they made Amendments in a similar Bill, of which he was in charge, and the House of Commons offered no objection on the ground of privilege. If there were to be competition between the licensed victuallers and the grocers, privileges ought not to be granted to one which the other did not enjoy.

VISCOUNT HALIFAX

said, that the licences to which the noble Earl (Earl Beauchamp) alluded were granted by the Excise, and not by the magistrates.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, it would be possible by inserting the words "nor shall any licence be granted to dealers in spirits under the Act," to attain the object desired. Otherwise injustice would be done to licensed victuallers, and he trusted the Government would take the matter into consideration.

EARL BEAUCHAMP

observed, that it was important that no vested interests should be acquired under the existing system by retail dealers and grocers; but as he trusted the noble Earl (the Earl of Morley) would be able to deal with the subject, he would not press his Amendment.

Amendment (by Leave of the Committee), withrawn.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 2 (Removal of licenses).

LORD HYLTON

objected to the clause, on the ground that by sanctioning the removal of licences from one part of the country to another it introduced an entirely new law. The provision was not in the Bill as originally introduced, and would, he feared, have the effect of increasing the evils at present existing in populous districts in consequence of the large number of publichouses.

Moved, to leave out Clause 2.—(The Lord Hylton.)

VISCOUNT MELVILLE

objected to the clause, as calculated to produce inconvenience.

THE EARL OF MORLEY

said, he thought that the clause would be of considerable use in limiting the number of publichouses by means of better distribution. In cases where there were too many publichouses in one district it would be an advantage if the magistrates could transfer licences to a neighbouring district requiring greater accommodation, for in this way the necessity for new licences would be avoided.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND

said, he believed the clause would cause great confusion in carrying on magisterial business. If the magistrates in the petty sessional division A thought they had too many publichouses they would be able to transfer licences to division B without consulting the magistrates of the latter division. Thus they would have jurisdiction over a division with which they were not connected.

VISCOUNT HALIFAX

explained that under the clause magistrates might transfer licences from one part to another part of their own division; and they could take licences from a neighbouring division. But words might be inserted requiring that the consent of the magistrates of the other division should be obtained.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND

said, if the clause was retained, it would require a further amendment to meet the cases of those counties where the licensing meetings were held in the autumn, or otherwise due notice could not be given by the parties concerned.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

said, that if the justices of one division held their licensing session some days before the justices of the neighbouring division, the latter would have to wait a whole year before they could obtain the consent of the former to a transfer.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

said, the persons intending to apply for licences would take care to obtain the consent of the first-named magistrates beforehand. As this Bill would prevent the granting of new licences, the clause was necessary in order to supply licences to districts where, from increase of population or other causes, they might be required, and to diminish publichouses in places where there was an excessive number.

LORD CHELMSFORD

appealed to his noble Friend (Lord Hylton) to postpone his objection until he saw whether it was amended in the Report.

On Question, That the said Clause stand part of the Bill? their Lordships divided:—Contents 26; Not-Contents 13: Majority 13.

Clause agreed to.

Remaining clauses agreed to.

The Report of the Amendments to be received on Thursday next.