PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENTS (HOUR OF OPENING) BILL—(No. 51.) (Hansard, 26 April 1875)

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that its purpose was in some degree similar to that which had just been postponed by the noble Duke (the Duke of St. Albans). The discussion in their Lordships' House early this Session brought out the anomalous position in which music-halls were placed under the existing law in not being able to open before 5 o'clock in the afternoon. In buildings like Exeter Hall or St. James's Hall the performance of Handel's oratorios before that hour would not merely be illegal, but would subject the proprietor to forfeit his licence. Whatever might have been the state of society when the Act of George II. was passed, there could be no objection at the present day to music in the afternoon, and therefore the present Bill proposed to alter the limit of time from 5 o'clock P.M. to noon. But in this case as in others where you dealt with one part of an existing system, you affected some other part; and therefore if the Bill was read a second time he would in Committee propose the insertion of a clause with regard to the hour of closing—he thought that question might very well be left to the discretion of the 1631 licensing magistrates. He would also propose a clause by which the Bill should take effect from Michaelmas, 1874. The result of that would be that in cases where the provisions of the Act of George II. had been transgressed no forfeiture would be entailed in that respect. The Bill would relieve music-halls in Westminster from the necessity of taking out a licence from the Lord Chamberlain.

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
said, he had listened with great attention to the noble Earl who introduced the measure, and was much disappointed to find that the scope of the Bill was so limited. He had hoped that the noble Earl would introduce some comprehensive measure which would put an end to the present anomalous condition of the law; but what was his disappointment to find a measure introduced of the most infinitesimal proportions, dealing only with the very smallest portion of the subject, and affecting only a small part of the metropolis. The noble Earl had told them that if once they touched a stone in a crazy old edifice, they found themselves obliged to meddle with other parts, and he had far better do so than try to patch up the present system. What he wanted to see was the introduction of a general measure, dealing with the whole subject of the licensing of theatres and places of public amusement.

THE MARQUESS OF HERTFORD
said, the anomalies connected with this subject arose from the licensing jurisdiction being in the hands of so many Benches of magistrates besides the Lord Chamberlain. There was at present no special machinery for regulating such places; but if the subject were taken up in the large and comprehensive manner desired by the noble Earl, they would have to appoint a Minister of Public Entertainments, with a large staff, and at a great expense.