Sarah
Hawkins Genealogy Site
Newspaper
Articles
Taunton Courier. Bristol and Exeter Journal, and Western Advertiser. Wednesday 15 Feb 1905
Page 5 Column 1-3
TAUNTON BREWSTER SESSIONS.
SATISFACTORY POLICE REPORT.
The Taunton Police-court presented an almost unique appearance on Wednesday, on the occasion of the annual Licensing Sessions. The body of the Court was occupied by the license-holders of the town and their representatives, while the Grand Jury box was crowded with representatives of the religious and temperance organisations of the town, who, headed by the Ven. Archdeacon ASKWITH and the Rev. J. P. TETLEY, were in attendance for the purpose of presenting a petition to the magistrates with reference to their powers under the new Licensing Act. There was a full Bench of magistrates, under the chairmanship of the Mayor (Councillor J. LEWIS), those also present being the ex-Mayor (Councillor A. VILLAR), Major-General EMERSON, Mr. J. E. W. WAKEFIELD, Mr. G. SAUNDERS, Councillor H. J. Van TRUMP, Alderman W. POTTER, Mr. C. J. GOODLAND, and Mr. T. PENNY.
SUPERINTENDENT DURHAM'S REPORT.
The first business was the reception of Superintendent DURHAM's annual report, in which he stated that there was 73 fully-licensed houses in the borough, 25 beer-houses with on-licenses, and one off-licensed beerhouse, together with 9 wine licenses, 2 off sweet[?], and 3 spirit licenses, making a total of 113 houses for the sale of intoxicants in the borough. Taking the population to be 22,000, and making allowance for children and those who do not drink, the town, he thought, was very well supplied with these places. Assuming that half of the population were either children or those who did not drink, it would give one house to less than 100 persons. If they divided the town into families, allowing 5 in each, including children, the proportion of houses to the population would be still less. If they reckoned the whole population there would be one house to 193⅔ of the population. During the year there had been an increase of 23 males brought before the Bench for being drunk. The females numbered the same as last years, 14. The number convicted last year was 24 males and 11 females, while this year the figures were 40 male and 9 females. Thirty-one of those convicted were locked up, and not summoned, and 20 were total strangers to the town – of the tramp class. Eleven of the cases were dismissed on payment of the costs. During the year the houses had all been very well conducted, and not a single case had come up for breach of the closing regulations or for disorderly conduct in the house. The only conviction was one for selling adulterated whisky, when the defendant was fined £1 and costs. Mr. DURHAM made mention of the fact that, under the new Act, license-holders would be required to provide reasonable refreshment and drink, other than intoxicants on demand, and expressed the opinion that it would be wise for licensed victuallers, and necessary in their own interests, to take cognisance of that provision, as if they refused to supply these things the justices could refuse to renew the licenses without compensation.
ARCHDEACON ASKWITH PRESENTS A PETITION.
The Ven. Archdeacon ASKWITH, on behalf of the deputation, presented a memorial, measuring some seven or eight yards in length, and signed by 587 persons in the borough, whom he described as very representative people. The memorial read as follows:- “We, the undersigned, beg respectfully to address you on the subject of the new Licensing Act. We, like yourselves, are deeply impressed with the importance of doing everything possible to lessen the evils of excessive drinking. We desire to strengthen your hands in the administration of the new Act. It is well known that many who were convinced that licensed houses in Taunton were more numerous than the needs of the population justified, were reluctant to see any of them closed without compensation, but the Act of 1904 has removed that objection. We therefore venture to hope that your Worships will take the necessary steps to put the Act into operation without delay. We desire, further, to beg your Worships not to sanction the removal to areas at present free from licensed houses, of any licenses that may be extinguished in other parts of the town; nor to grant new licenses for such areas. In addition to the powers conferred upon you in relation to fully-licensed houses, and ante 1869 beer houses, you have now the authority over grocers' licenses, and can not only refuse absolutely new applications, but can refuse renewal of those which have been granted since June, 1902. In view of the appalling increase in intemperance among women we are glad to believe that you will see the advisability of lessening facilities for their obtaining intoxicating liquors when they are purchasing articles of domestic consumption.” The Archdeacon remarked that they felt every confidence that their Worships would do all that it was possible to do to carry the new Act into operation. In coming there they had no intention to dictate to their Worships, and he hoped they would not think that in any way, because they felt that the magistrates would do all they could to promote temperance in the borough. It had been said that a decrease in the number of public-houses did not necessarily mean a decrease in intemperance, but it certainly decreased the opportunities and facilities for intemperance. They desired to impress upon their Worships, if they might, that although they were quite sure they would impartially and fairly administer the new Act, they hoped that at the same time they would bear in mind that there were higher interests to be considered, and that there was a moral side to the question, which they trusted the magistrates would not lose sight of.
The Rev. J. P. TETLEY supported the prayer of the memorial, and emphasised the fact that they did not in any sense wish to dictate or prescribe to the magistrates any mode of conduct for the administration of the Act. He drew attention to the fact that in Taunton they had a public-house to every 220 of the people, whilst in other towns the proportion of houses was much smaller in comparison with the population. He suggested that the magistrates might certainly take steps without injury to the trade, but with great advantage to the public morals of the town, to reduce the number of licensed houses.
The Mayor, in reply, thanked the Archdeacon and the Rev. J. P. TETLEY for their kind expression of confidence in them, remarking they felt it was quite consistent with their high calling for them to appear that morning. He would like to assure them on behalf of the magistrates that they had already had the provisions of the new Act under their very careful consideration, and the justices had been actuated by only one desire, and that was to do their duty in as impartial a manner as possible.
Archdeacon ASKWITH thanked His Worship and the magistrates for receiving them so courteously. They felt sure they could leave the matter in their hands with every confidence.
LICENSE-HOLDERS AND THE NEW ACT.
Mr. C. P. CLARKE, solicitor to the Taunton and West Somerset Licensed Victuallers' Association, said that they were perfectly satisfied that the magistrates would do justice to all parties. They were certain the magistrates would give each individual case that consideration which even licensed victuallers deserved. With reference to certain provisions in the Licensing Act mentioned by Mr. DURHAM, he pointed out that so far as the Association with which he was connected was concerned no complaint had ever been made of any refusal to supply customers with other than intoxicating liquors. He was quite sure that the principle of that clause in the Act would be carried out in its entirety by the members of the Association.
Mr. J. E. W. WAKEFIELD, one of the magistrates, emphasised what had been said with reference to the provisions of the new Act, and pointed out that under one of the clauses thereof the justices could require license-holders to give a certain undertaking. As the Act had only just come into operation,and was not, so far as this particular provision was concerned, fully understood, no such undertaking would be asked for this year, but a very vigilant watch would be kept by the police authorities to ascertain where it would be necessary to recommend the justices to insist on such an undertaking in future. This undertaking if imposed and not carried out would have the same effect on the license as if the house had been improperly conducted.
“LITTLE TO COMPLAIN OF.”
The Mayor, reverting to the Superintendent's report, said that the magistrates had little to complain of with regard to the management of the licensed houses in the borough, and they were anxious that those occupying the houses should co-operate with the police in every possible way, so that the drunkenness in the town might be gradually lessened, and that no facilities should be given to young people, and especially girls, for drinking.
THE LONG PULL.
Mr. C. P. CLARKE then applied for the renewal of all the licenses. With reference to what Mr. WAKEFIELD had said, he asked the magistrates to impose an undertaking on the licensed victuallers of the town with reference to what was known as the “long pull,” which meant that if a man went to a house and ordered a quart of beer he got 25 per cent. more than that quantity. He considered it was unfair, and pointed out that undertakings to discontinue this kind of thing had been imposed in Manchester, Birmingham, Lichfield, and other places, where the practice had previously been in vogue.
The Mayor said they had already had the question before them, and had decided to do what Mr. CLARKE had suggested. He asked Mr. CLARKE to name the houses where the “long pull” was given.
Mr. CLARKE replied that as a matter of fact all the houses were now giving it, because of two or three who would not give up the practice. He, therefore, asked the magistrates to impose the obligation upon all those who applied for the renewal of their licenses at the present Sessions.
Superintendent DURHAM hoped the magistrates would impose the condition as suggested by Mr. CLARKE.
SEVEN LICENSES TO BE RE-CONSIDERED.
The Mayor then announced that the Bench had decided to renew all the licenses in the town with the exception of seven, on the distinct understanding that the practice of giving the “long pull” should be discontinued, failing which they would next year be called upon to give an undertaking to do so. The seven houses in question would be left for further consideration under the new Act, and they were: - Bird in Hand, Mary-street; Crown and Mitre, Pigmarket;Three Mariners, High-street; Spread Eagle, North-street; Golden Lion, East Reach; King and Queen, Paul-street; and Tailor's Arms, Upper High-street.
A NEW NAME.
On the application of Mr. CLARKE, permission was granted to alter the name of the Albion Inn, East Reach, to the Beresford Arms.
THE G.W.R. REFRESHMENT ROOMS.
The Magistrates' Clerk announced that the Great Western Railway Company had applied for a reduction of charges for licenses under Note I. of the Act, with reference to their station refreshment room. The note in question provided that relief could be given to places of private and public entertainment, railway refreshment rooms, and other places, the justices having the power to reduce the ordinary charge for licenses to not less than one-third.
Mr. A. N. LAILEY, stationmaster at Taunton, drew attention to the fact that it was clearly laid down that railway refreshment rooms were entitled to this reduction.
The magistrates decided to grant the reduction of the amount of the license by one-third.
This concluded the business.