unsettled life for the interval; they are again disappointed, but not unfrequently the builder will cling to his loss, and petition and pay fees year after year, for seven or eight years, before he understands what he should have known at first. The expectation then usually terminates, if a public-house be likely to florish in the situation, in his selling his house for half its value to the brewer; or in some other house near to it being so purchased and forthwith licensed.

In such a vortex of intrigue, or loss, it is evident that no inde pendent man will enter, unless it be from ignorance of facts, The arena is at this time chiefly filled with brewers, or speculators acting under their support. If the brewers were excluded by law, it does not follow that independent gentlemen would supply their room as candidates for licenses, subject to the degradation of soliciting votes, or the heavy risk of losing their property. It is therefore strongly recommended,—with a view to encourage the owners. of estates to become the owners also of the public-houses belonging to and supported by such estates, instead of brewers and speculators; and further, with a view to lessen the motives for using improper means and exertions to procure licenses,-that the Magistrates be instructed to decide when and where a new public-house may be opened BEFORE it is built, instead of AFTERWARDS.

With this provision established, with a prohibition against licensing for brewers, and with a power of appeal where the Justices grant or refuse licenses improperly, secured by law, we may justly expect to find the public supplied with better beer, and on lower terms than at present; to see public-houses improve in decency and regularity; the publicans (emerging from their present dependence on the brewers) become more respectable and responsible; drunkenness, idleness, and crime, checked in their progress; and the magisterial character relieved from the implica tion in which the uncontrollable acts of some individuals are occasionally found to sully it, particularly in the neighbourhood of the metropolis.

I am, &c.

London, Nov. 30.

A MIDDLESEX MAGISTRATE.

No. IV.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

SIR,

THE discussion on the mysteries of public-house licensing, which has lately taken place, must, I imagine, convince every impartial person, that if there be any law in the statute book, which stands in need of revision, it is that which regards the above subject. That the evils complained of should have reached their present height ought not, however, to excite surprize, when it is considered, that the portentous power of opening and shutting up public-houses, of raising men to affluence, or depressing them to a gaol, or a work-house, is exercised by certain individuals, subject to no other control than their own wills-to no other monition than that of their own consciences. Is it not strange that a power over the property of the subject, so despotic, as to be denied by the Legislature to the first Judges of the land-as, by Magna Charta, to be prohibited in the Sovereign himself-should be carelessly tossed into the hands of such men as these licensers are oftentimes seen to be? What more could be expected from a Turkish Cadi, Moulah, or Bashaw, than the confiscation of a man's property, "without the sufferer being found guilty of any crime, without his being accused, without its being stated that he has committed an offence ?"

Far be it from me to speak disrespectfully of the office of a Justice of the Peace, no man sets a higher value than myself upon the character. What can be more useful or admirable than the services of an enlightened, independent, and public-spirited gentleman, gratuitously employed in the administration of justice among his neighbours, unallured by lust of power, and unbiassed by objects of personal advantage? But Justices of the Peace are not all of this description; they are a numerous body of men, and like others, consist of good, bad, and indifferent. I believe they are not always sought out for their eminent virtues and talents; but, about the metropolis at least, themselves seek the office in very many instances, and make long and circuitous exertions to procure it.

There are several Justices, the date of whose main success in life is co-evous with that of their commissions. It is also very usual for tradesmen who have made fortunes by close, and, I will add, commendable attention to their shops, when retiring from their counters to country-houses and gentility, to desire the importance of office to be added to that of money. But it is to be doubted whether the very habits which raise these gentlemen, in a pecuniary view, above their fellows, do not frequently, in other respects, leave them lowermost, and peculiarly unfit them to discharge the duties of Justices of the Peace. The monotonous attentions required by a thriving trade leave little leisure for the acquisition of liberal knowledge. The life-long vigilance exercised in eking a profit out of every transaction, has to undergo a great transmutation to resist the alFurements of delicately-offered advantages from those who seek the benefit of official civilities; and the subdued sentiments of men habituated to shape their thoughts, words, and acts, to the humor of their customers, are little favorable to the pure inductions, and direct judicial conclusions which compose the true dignity of the magisterial character. In the event, we see, that when gentlemen of this order are made into Justices, they too often become mere echoes to others of more knowledge and boldness, excepting that, as opportunities serve, they are apt to discharge on the heads of people in their power, the suppressed pride of half a century, in showers so coarse and heavy, as to be scarcely endurable. Power, we know, is ever most harshly and repulsively exercised by those who have long been its slaves, and who are newly inflated by office. To such hands, surely the only absolute authority exercised in England over the property of its inhabitants ought not to be committed. It may be said that their power is not wholly absolute; that the law has not left sufferers destitute; for if the licensers act corruptly, they are liable to a criminal information. This, however, is little more than a nominal protection. It may sometimes effect purposes of retribution, but it will not restore a sequestrated property. For the first object, a half-ruined man cannot be expected to devote the wreck of his means in a lawsuit with a Bench of Justices. We have, indeed, some few instances in which this course has been taken, and in which justice has reached the Justices. Thus in "The King v. Williams and Davis, E. 2, George III." the defen

dants threatened to ruin such ale-house keepers as voted for a member of parliament contrary to their direction, by taking away their licenses; and this threat they afterwards carried into effect. Here, and in some similar cases, the corrupt motive was so clearly proved, that the complainants succeeded, and the justices were punished; but so many applications of this nature have terminated unfavorably, the contest is so unequal, and the leading licensers are so well aware of the precautions necessary to secure themselves from committal, that although in some divisions, it may be as visible as the sun at noon-day, and be declared by inferior agents, that a man's procuring a new license, or preserving an old one, is dependent on his dealing with a certain brewer or spirit-seller, the evil doing can seldom be proved at its source. Facts yielding a reasonable inference may be notorious, but not exist in a tangi. ble shape against the principals-the licensers have only to decide in silence, and their decision cannot be questioned. Their impunity, and the public loss, are included in the simple rule, that they are not bound to show reasons for what they do, and from what they do there is no appeal!

Now this system of secret decision, I contend, is as false in policy as it is inequitable in principle.-The proper end of punishment is example; but how is this supplied where forfeiture is inflicted, but no offence imputed ?-where the sufferer is set adrift on the world, crying out, that untried, unimpeached, and unconscious of a misdeed, he is mulcted of his all, and banished from his house, and the exercise of his calling? Is not the lesson of justice here inverted, and proof furnished that no innocence is secure from the hand of oppression, rather than that punishment pursues the guilty alone?

* It has been said that the licensing justices themselves constitute a sort of jury; but a moment's consideration will show that they are wanting in every essential character of jurymen.-Jurymen are taken indiscriminately from a mass at the time of trial; they know nothing of the matter whereon they have to decide, until it is brought before them in their collective capacity. If suspected of prejudice by the party to be judged, they may be ob jected to-they cannot separate during the course of an investigation, or be approached by the interested parties-they finally build their verdict upon evidence openly given and fairly discussed, not upon secret reasons and private conferences.

From contemplating the bad effects of this despotism I have turned, in search of some good ones, that may be compassed by it --but in vain; considering it likely, that public-houses may sometimes become so disorderly as to require speedier means than those of a legal prosecution, to put a stop to them; the inquiry has been made, whether the licensing power in question does not supply such prompt summary jurisdiction—it does not. It is only on one day in the whole year that the decision is made: during which course of time half a dozen convictions at law might be procured. Is it then useful as a rod in terrorem over the publicans? I believe this to be the only plausible excuse that can be offered for the power of withholding licenses without assigned reasons or appeal; and this is unsound. It is so, because the power may be set at defiance for twelve months; and before that period arrives, the publican, if deficient in other means, may evade the forfeiture of his license by transferring it to a new man. This is the constant practice in districts where the best application of the licensing power obtains. But in other districts, where disorderly houses are upheld, and decent ones refused, the only effect is to throw the tenantcy into the hands of persons of sufficient interest to protect them in their licenses. The reliance of the publican is thus diverted from good conduct to good interest! In short, whatever convenience may be occasionally derived from this uncontrollable secret tribunal in chaste hands, I am well convinced that it is infinitely outbalanced by the evils of its general use. Whenever the power of withholding licenses is used rightly, it might with equal effect be used, on avowed reasons, and without fear of revisal; or, if the present laws be insufficient for the effectual control of publicans, let those laws be strengthened: but let the publicans, like other men, be governed (and punished, when necessary) according to law, not according to the capricious will and secret reasons of individuals. To punish on secret reasons is the very abomination of tyranny. Sultans and Deys may torture on such principles, but it is the essence of an Englishman's birthright to enjoy his property and privileges without disturbance while unoffending against the laws, and to be considered innocent until proved to be guilty.

In justice, then, to the individual rights of that numerous por