186 
Market Bights and Tolls. 
of a town pay rates for the purpose of providing accommodation for 
their rivals ? The answer given by the advocates of the principle 
is, that it is necessary for every town to provide food for its inhabit- 
ants at the cheapest possible rate. To this it is replied, on behalf 
of the ratepayers, that if all market tolls were abolished to-morrow 
the consumers would not be perceptibly benefited. Mr. W. H. 
Talbot, the Deputy Town Clerk of Manchester, says of his Council : 
We see no justice in such a suggestion. This is property which has 
heen paid for and is used without extortion or without unfairness. We 
think also that it would open the door to great abuse in the shape of 
favouritism and corruption of all kinds, and we do not think the consumers 
would be perceptibly benefited by it. 
Mr. Fulford, the Chairman of the Markets Committee at Birming- 
ham, says : — 
I have no doubt that the benefit obtained by the reduction of tolls would 
go into the pockets of the sellers. 
This is important testimony, and it is corroborated by the evidence 
obtained from almost every market owner in the kingdom. Such 
profits, moreover, can never be large, and are the natural reward of 
a careful and generous administration. 
Next in order to free markets it is natural to consider very 
shortly the subject of free hawking. This is a larger subject than 
would at first sight appear, and in nearly every town is the cause of 
constant consideration and frequent dispute. The difficulties con- 
nected with it range from the important question of serious injury 
to the town market by competition to the comparatively unimportant 
question of annoyance to foot passengers by obstruction. The ques- 
tion certainly ought not to be ignored in any Bill which professes to 
deal exhaustively with markets. It is not directly dealt with by 
the majority of the Commissioners, but free hawking is no doubt 
implied in the abolition of Monopoly Rights. Mr. William Little 
says of it (p. 124) : — 
The practice of hawking is generally permitted under certain conditions, 
but some amendment of the law in this particular seems desii-able. I would 
suggest that Local Authorities, being market owners, should have the power 
of regulating hawking by issuing permits or licences to hawkers imder con- 
ditions approved by the Local Government Board. 
Mr. Picton and Mr. Mahony say (p. 125) : — 
Hawkers should be freed from the charges imposed on them in the 
interest of markets. 
I much prefer the opinion of Mr. Little, and so does Mr. Ashton ; 
and I think it will be found that our opinion is in accordance with 
the views of most market authorities, and very generally of the 
hawkers themselves. The fii-st hardly requires illustration, but I 
may state that not only did I receive many complaints of unfair 
competition, and obstruction of the streets, but health officers often 
gave evidence to show that without some system of licences there 
was no protection against the sale of unwholesome food, whilst Chief 
