KINGSGATE CASTLE 185 



to sit on the committee on this question for which 

 he had moved, in February, in the House of Lords. 

 Lord Sahsbury, though recognising the existing 

 evil, was not wiUing to go so far as Lord Avebury 

 would have wished in the direction of a drastic 

 remedial measure. On June 14 he notes : " Early 

 Closing Committee. They agreed to recommend 

 the Bill, Hardwicke not committing himself and 

 Salisbury not being there." Three days later 

 he was hoping that the Committee's final decision 

 would be taken, but has to record : " We dis- 

 cussed the Report, but came to no final vote. 

 To my great disappointment. Lord Salisbury 

 pronounced himself strongly against the Bill." 

 However, on the 20th, when the Committee met 

 again, he writes : " Salisbury said he admitted 

 the evil, and felt bound to propose a remedy. 

 He accepted the proposal to confer the power 

 (of early closing) on Local Authorities, but 

 thought it should be done by Provisional Order, 

 so that Parliament might intervene if it thought 

 fit. He accepted the body of the Report and 

 we thought it best to take this suggestion, so 

 as to get an unanimous report." 



Lord Salisbury's objection to the Bill as 

 originally proposed was, briefly, that it would 

 enable a majority of tradesmen in any trade to 

 favour their own interests by putting a forcible 

 restraint on their competitors. It was for this 

 reason that he desired that the local option 

 should be given by Provisional Order, retaining 

 to Parliament the right, if occasion arose, of 

 interference. 



The shop people in many parts of the country 



