(NO. 142.) SECOND READING. (Hansard, 16 July 1883)

§ THE EARL OF MOUNT EDGCUMBE

, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it was the same in principle as similar Bills which had been passed for other parts of the country. The noble Earl on the Cross Benches (the Earl of Wemyss), who had spoken against the Bill "elsewhere," had since become a Member of their Lordships' House; and as he (the Earl of Mount Edgcumbe) had seen a Notice in the papers, to the effect that the noble Earl intended opposing the second reading of the Bill, he was bound to do what he could to anticipate his objections. He did not know on what grounds the noble Earl meant to base his opposition; but he was evidently one of those who thought that if one person out of 100, or out of 1,000, had a desire to do something that was not criminal, the remaining 99, or 999, had no right to prevent his having an opportunity of doing it. He (the Earl of Mount Edgcumbe) was not going to enter into the question of the abstract right of majorities; but, if the noble Earl's principle was to be carried to its legitimate length, it must necessarily apply to a great deal of legislation which many of their Lordships would be sorry to see altered. Such an objection would, in fact, be inconsistent with all closing; and the noble Earl, to be logical, would have to join hands with the anti-vaccinators, and to oppose all acts of a repressive character. A very strong opinion was entertained in favour of the measure by those who would be affected by it. The population of Cornwall, at the last Census, numbered 330,000; and he believed that it was almost an unprecedented thing, out of such a population as that, that from 120,000 to 130,000 had signed Petitions in favour of the measure. He might say, also, that all the Mayors of boroughs, legitimate officers, speaking in a sense of responsibility, had supported the Petitions; 1498 that two Town Councils, acting in their corporate capacity, had also signed Petitions, and so had three Boards of Guardians, men who knew the feelings and wants of their neighbours; whilst 46 public meetings were held wholly with favourable issues as regarded the measure. He knew, of course, it might be said that Petitions were not worth much, and that people were indolent, and signed it under the influence of others; but he would ask what other means had the bulk of the people of making their wishes known to Parliament? There were only two means open to them. One was to make a particular question a test question at the Election, which was most unsatisfactory, because an Election only occurred occasionally, and the question was subordinated by other matters of far greater national importance, and far greater than the particular object which might be had in view. And the other was by Petition. Political agitators might induce people to sign Petitions, perhaps ignorantly or thoughtlessly, on many subjects. They might offer the hope of some advantage, such as increased political power, or they might excite their passions on some real or sentimental grievance, or some class jealousy. But this was a very different question from that. The most ignorant country bumpkin knew better than the noble Earl what would be the effect of closing public-houses in his village on Sundays; and he, in the nature of a self-denying ordinance, petitioned against their being opened, thus setting the example of a sacrifice. This made the Petitions worthy of consideration. And this feeling was shown by gentlemen who had the most clear and accurate instinct of the wishes of the people in their own neighbourhood. There were 13 Representatives of Cornwall in Parliament, and all but two had given their unconditional support to the measure. There was, he admitted, a feeling that gentlemen who had their own clubs and cellars had no right to impose restrictive measures upon others. That was a very natural sentiment; and, when he was first asked to associate himself with the promotion of this measure, he entirely refused, simply on the ground that it was not the business of a person who would not be affected by the Bill to attempt to carry it into law. But having been shown that 1499 the genuine feeling of the county was in favour of it, he felt that it was his duty to support it in Parliament. They knew that the Licensed Victuallers' Association was strong, and that its strength depended simply upon its union; and it could not be made matter of complaint if a small publican should feel himself bound to throw in his lot with the others, and seek the assistance of the London Society. He knew very well that the wise men did not come from the West. Sunday Closing had succeeded in Wales. The only two objections which he had seen to it there were—first, that it had lessened the rents of some public-houses; and next, that it was harassing to the magistrates on the Border line, where men went across to drink in counties where the law was not in force, and returned before they had recovered from the effects of their expedition. The second of these objections would not apply in the case of Cornwall, as the boundary was one which could be easily maintained. The noble Earl concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill.