THE HISTORY OF LIQUOR
LICENSING IN ENGLAND
PRINCIPALLY FROM 1700
TO 1830
BY
SIDNEY AND BEATRICE WEBB
LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO., 39
PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON,
NEW YORK & BOMBAY. OCT. 1903.
PKEFACE
IT is needful to preface this little book with
an explanation. Four years ago we began
an elaborate investigation into English Loeal
Government during the eighteenth and nine-
teenth centuries. Our task quickly divided
itself into two parts. We had first to discover
the structure of local government., to unravel
and describe the exact constitution and working
all over the country of the Open arid Select
Vestries, the Manorial Courts, the Commissioners
of Sewers, the various kinds of statutory bodies
established under special Acts, the County
Justices in Petty arid Quarter Sessions, and the
Municipal Corporations. We had then to classify
local government according to function, and to
treat, one by one, such different public services
as the Relief of Destitution, the Prevention of
Crime, the Cleaning and Paving of Streets, the
v
vi LIQUOR LICENSING IN ENGLAND
Regulation of Trade, the Maintenance of Churches,
Harbours, Docks, Roads, and Bridges, and the
raising of a municipal revenue by duties and
tolls, rates and assessments. The results of this
investigation into both structure and function,
for the period up to the reforms of 1832-35, we
hope to publish in the course of 1904. Moan-
while it has been suggested to us that our
chapter on the Regulation of the Liquor Traffic,
especially its hitherto unknown episode of 178 Or
87, with the dramatic suppression of licensed
houses without compensation, might be specially
instructive at this juncture, and that it may
interest readers who would not care to study
the whole range of English Local Government.
The drawbacks of separate publication are con-
siderable. In the course of our narrative we
have constantly referred to contemporary facts
dealt with in other chapters, such, for instance,
as the diversity in character and procedure of
the different benches of Justices of the Peace in
urban and rural districts, in London and the
municipal corporations. These facts will not
necessarily be known to the general reader.
Moreover, for students mainly interested in the
PREFACE vii
modern controversy, a mere shred of history
cut out of its context, beginning at 1700, and
ending abruptly at 1830, cannot provide satis-
factory reading. The first of these drawbacks
we have sought to meet by appending many
footnotes to the text. The second we have
tried to diminish, by prefixing a short historical
introduction, and appending a summary of
licensing legislation since 1830, drawn from
obvious sources.
With this explanation of some of its imper-
fections, we offer the following sketch of what
did happen between 1700 and 1830, as possibly
contributing towards an understanding of the
present problem. We carefully abstain from
pointing any moral or drawing any conclu-
sions as to present day policy.
We must add that we are indebted for the
fulness of detail and richness of variety in
our work to our two zealous and able assist-
ants and colleagues, Mr. K II Spencer, and
Miss Amy Harrison, B.A., D.Sc. (now Mrs.
Spencer). Nor would the work have been
possible but for the treasures of the British
Maiseum, and, in particular, its invaluable col-
viii LIQUOK LICENSING IN ENGLAND
lection of old provincial newspapers, which it
was, at one time, actually proposed to disperse !
We venture to express our strongest hopes that
whatever else is sent away, these files of old
provincial newspapers without which the social
history of England cannot possibly be written
will be kept at Bloomsbury, where they arc
accessible to the historical student, and where
(as it is privately admitted) there is ample
accommodation for them.
SIDNEY AND BEATEIOE WEBB.
41 GROSVENOR ROAD, WESTMINSTER,
September 1903.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
i'AUK
THE FIRST CKNTUKY OK LICENHINO 1
CHAPTER II
A PwEroi) ov LAXNK.SS ........ 16
CHAPTER III
REGULATION AND SuP.PlUW.sr ON ...... 49
CHAPTER IV
FUME TUADK IN TJIKOUY AND ritAcvnuK .... 85
CHAPTER V
L'KGIIHLATIVK llKPKWTANOK ....... 127
APPENDIX
THE MovjfiMKNT FOK THE EKFOJJ.MATION OP MAKKKRB . . 187
INDEX
ix
CHAPTER I
THE FIRST CENTURY OF LICENSING
WK have made no study of the numerous in-
stances of manorial or municipal regulation of
the liquor traffic in England prior to the six-
teenth century. It is easy to find, in such
scanty records of the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries as are yet printed, curiously exact
precedents, in one town or manor or another,
at one period or another, for almost every
modern expedient of dealing with the liquor
traffic. 1 Nor can we pretend to have made any
systematic investigation into the working of the
legislation of the sixteenth century. But in
1 Some of tliOHO arc given, together with a good account of
licensing history down to 1642, in the article, "Early Stages of
English Public HOUHO Regulation," by Mina C. M. lies, of tho
London School of Economics and Political Science, in tho Economic
Jown&l for Juno 1903. For examples of enforcement of the liquor
regulations of the manorial Court from M15 onwards see Fulham Old
and New, by 0. J. Fdrot (1900), vol. i. pp. 25-26 ; and tho Manchester
Court L&ct .Records,
B
2 LIQUOR LICENSING IN ENGLAND
order to enable the history of the eighteenth
century to be understood, we shall give a brief
outline of the course of events during the pre-
ceding century and a half.
The regulation of the trade in alcoholic liquors
originated, not in any abstract theory, but in a
practical necessity of the State. It was found
that the free use of intoxicating drinks pro-
duced not only incapacity and disease among
all classes, but also, among the " lower orders,"
idleness and disorderly living, crimes against
life and property, and even riot and rebellion.
Total prohibition of the production and sale of
intoxicants was, in face of the ease of manufac-
ture and the absence of police, plainly impractic-
able. Moreover, beer, at any rate, was univer-
sally regarded as a necessity of life ; it was the
common beverage at every meal; and all but
a small minority of the population habitually
enjoyed drinking. On the other hand, the evils
of excessive drinking were so manifest and
so widespread, that the Government, in every
generation, has felt compelled to do something
more than punish the crimes which drunkenness
produces. For more than three hundred years
the manufacture and sale of alcoholic drinks has
been brought under special statutory regulation.
The primary object of this legislation has been
FIRST CENTURY OF LICENSING 3
to prevent the social disorder and personal mis-
conduct brought about by excessive drinking;
and the legislators have sought to place obstacles
to the unrestricted sale of intoxicants to in-
dividuals. But this main purpose has been,
from time to time, complicated and thwarted
by two material considerations : the discovery,
made by successive governments, that taxes on
alcoholic drinks provided an easy and copious
source of revenue, and the desire to promote the
extensive native industries of brewing and dis-
tilling. Under the influence of these diverse
and often conflicting motives, the regulation of
the liquor traffic has, in England, been shared
between the central executive and the local
authorities. The national Government has always
taken for itself the revenue to be derived from
alcohol, whether in the form of royal patents,
excise duties on the manufacture, custom duties
on the imports, or revenue licences of the
dealers. We might omit all reference to these
national taxes, and to the extensive system of
official control devised for their protection, as
forming no part of English local government.
On the other hand, the duty of regulating the
consumption of alcoholic drinks in such a way
as to obviate social disorder has always been
left to the local authorities, and we shall find it
4 LIQUOK LICENSING IN ENGLAND
impossible, in describing their exercise of this
function, to avoid mentioning the action of the
national Government, when, in the purmiit of
revenue or for other reasons, ita regulations
interfered with, and even ousted, the powers of
Justices of the Peace.
The device of licensingthat is, the require-
ment that any person desiring to puraue a
particular occupation shall first obtain specific
permission from a governing authority may be
used to attain many different ends. The licence
may be merely an occasion for extracting a fee
or levying a tax. It may be an iiwtrument for
registering all those who are following a particu-
lar occupation, in order, for some reason or
another, to ensure their being brought under
public notice. It may be a device for limiting
the numbers of those so engaged, or for Helecting
them according to their possession of certain
qualifications. Finally, the act of licenwing may
be the means of imposing special rules upon the
occupation, or of more easily enforcing the ful-
filment either of these special rules or of the
general law of the land.
The function of licensing, as it has been
delegated by Parliament to the Justices of the
Peace, has always included three distinct forms
of control : the power of selection, the power
FIRST CENTURY OF LICENSING 5
of withdrawal, and the power of imposing
conditions.
By the statute of 5 and 6 Edward VI c. 25
(1552) the Justices of the Peace were authorised
to select from time to time, at their discretion,
certain persons in each county or borough who
were alone to exercise the trade of keeping a
common alehouse. 1 From this time forth, the
occupation became an exceptional privilege, to
which no person could assert a right.* The
Justices had full discretion as to the persons
whom they would license, a discretion which
Parliament limited only by certain insignificant
requirements. 3 What was of importance was
1 There has always been a. di.stinc.tiou between an inn which
lodges and entertains traveller, and a common alehouse which aoll
alo to all-comers. Originally an inn (Dal ton, o. 56 ; Blackorby, 170)
or a lodging-houso (Parker and Flint, 1(199, 12 Mod. 254), even if
it supplied alo to its lodgers, required no licence. An inn might, by
common law, bo indicted an a public nuisance, if it wan improperly
conducted, or oven if it wan Hot n]> where it was not needed (1 Haw.
226), But, aa imiK practically always supplied alo to all-comers,
they wore quickly brought under the operation of the requirement to
obtain licences an common alehouses and their regulation by way of
indictment became obsolete.
* In 1604 the King pointed out in a Privy Council circular letter
that, " By the law and statutes of thin our realm, the keeping of ale-
houses and victualling houses is none of Uio.se trades which it is free
and lawful for any subject to net up and exorcise, but inhibited to all
save such at* are thereto licensed."
8 Prior to 1729 the licence might be granted at any time by any
two JuBliooH, but by 2 George II, c. 28 (1729) the woll-knowu
" BrewaterSeHHiouH" was innUtutcd, all licences having to be granted
at a general HCHHion.s of the Justices of the (Uvision, of which one was
to be held for this purpose in September of each year.
6 LIQUOR LICENSING IN ENGLAND
the fact that Parliament, from the outset,
implied l that the number of licences was to be
kept down to just enough for the supply of the
legitimate wants of each neighbourhood, thus
creating a sort of monopoly. Moreover, there
was no idea of selling this monopoly to the
highest bidder, and the Justices were, in fact,
required to issue their licence without charge.
The result was that the Justices had it in their
power to create a valuable property, and to give
it to whom they chose.
The power of withdrawing the permission to
sell intoxicating liquors is, curiously enough,
older than the power to select the sellers. By
11 Henry VII. c. 2 (1495), strengthened by
19 Henry VII. c. 12 (1504), as part of the policy
of discouraging indoor games, which diverted the
people from archery, any two Justices were
authorised summarily to suppress useless ale-
houses in their neighbourhood, 2 and it was
primarily to strengthen this power " to reject
and put away common ale-selling in the towns
and places where they should think convenient "
as they thought meet and convenient, in order
1 Thus, the reason for the institution of special "Browator
Sessions " was so that licences might not bo granted ' { by Justices who,
living remote from the places of abode " of the applicants, " may not
be truly informed as to the occasion or want o/such inns or common
alehouses " (2 George II. c. 28, 1729).
2 History of Taxes and Taxation, by S. DowoH (1888), vol. iv. p. 91.
FIRST CENTURY OF LICENSING 7
to prevent " the intolerable hurts and troubles to
the commonwealth of the realm, daily growing
and increasing," that the first licencing Act of
1552 was passed. With the same object, these
alehouse licences were required by the Justices to
be renewed annually, so that a mere refusal to
renew amounted to, and apparently superseded,
the statutory power of suppression. 1 The full
power of the Justices to refuse the renewal of a
licence, entirely at their own discretion, and
without assigning cause, was questioned, from
time to time, but has always been upheld by the
superior courts. The reason for refusal in the
Justices' minds might be Home misconduct of the
publican, or it might be merely that they had
come to the conclusion that the. number of
licences in the neighbourhood was greater than
the existing needs warranted. Tims, jtiat as the
magistrates could create valuable property, and
1 The term for which tho permission or licence of the Justices
should ho granted was not; specified by 5 and Edward VI. c. 26
(1552), but before tho end of tho sixteenth century it scorns to have
become customary for Justices to give tho licence for one your only
(see a form of 1591 in Wost'fl tfymlwliMujrttpliy, 1000). A royal pro-
clamation of 1018 definitely proscribed a form of licence for ono year,
and this acorns to havo boon universally adopted. Tho annual
renewal wan implicitly required by Anno c. 10 (1711), imposing an
annual stamp duty, but it was not explicitly mado requisite by
statute until 20 George II, c, 81 (1758). See Mr. Bonharn Carter's
evidence before tho Royal Commission on Liquor Licensing, 1897-90,
and his valuable historical memorandum, in vol. iii. of tho
ings of this Commission.
8 LIQUOR LICENSING IN ENGLAND
freely endow any individual with it, so they
could, at any "brewster sessions," arbitrarily
destroy the property that they had created, and
deprive the holder of it without compensation, 1
The power of imposing conditions on the
licensees was not expressly conferred by statute
but really flowed from the coexistence of the
powers of selection and withdrawal. Parlia-
ment, whilst repeating that there was to be no
tippling or disorder, had failed to prescribe under
what accompaniments in the way of accommo-
dation or recreation the sale of liquor should be
conducted. Eight down to the end of the period
1 The Judges always refused to issue a mandamufl to the JunticeH to
grant a licence, even on affidavit of their having maliciously or
corruptly refused it (Strange, 881 ; 1 Barnard i.ston, 402). The
superior courts showed, in fact, groat reluctances to question tho
Justices' discretion in tho matter. But "if it clearly appears," nai. Wakefield ; see tho judgment roprintwl in vol.
ix. of the Proceedings of the Royal Commission on Liquor Liccnsim/,
1897-99.
FIRST CENTURY OF LICENSING 9
that we have under review, Parliament abstained
from fixing the hours of opening ami closing,
on week-clays and Sundays, or prescribing the
conditions under which the sale of liquor should
take place, contenting itself always with the
arbitrary control of the Justices, on the one hand,
and the profit which the Exchequer derived from
the exaction of excise and licence duties on the
other. 1 Thus, it was open to the Justices at any
particular time or place to make it known that
they would not license the sale of liquor in
premises remote from public observation, or in-
adequate in accommodation .for the customers ;
that they did not approve of music or dancing
or other entertainments on licensed premises ;
that they insisted on the premises being closed
at nine o'clock in the evening ; and, in fact, to
make the renewal of the licence virtually con-
ditional on compliance with any requirement
connected with the conduct of the trade that
they might think lit to impose.
That the Act of 1552 was carried out by the
1 Tho oarliont Htatuto (11 Henry VII. . 2, 1405) had om powered any
two JtiHtiiJGfl "to tako Hurotios of kooporn of alohouHca in their good
bohaving," ThcHO had ds on barrows by men
and women, openly exposed for sale on every
market stall, forced on tin*- maidservant-H and
other purchasers at the chandler's shop, distri-
buted by the watermen on the* Thames, vended
by pedlars in the suburban bines, and freely
offered in every house of ill-fame, until, as one
contemporary writer puts in, " one-half of the
town seems set up to furnish poison to the other
half," 2 "Every one who now panseB through
1 12 and 13 William III, o. 11 (1701), and I Ann*', Mat. 2, c. 14
(1702). An attempt by tho DUtillurH' Company to obtain jwwr to
inspect all spirits, and hwint ou good quality, though at tot
favoured by the House of Comment*, was not mado law (iiouKQ of
Commons Journals, 17 tit and 27th February, 
