I have before me all the verbatim reports of that historic meeting. The fairest and most unbiased seems to me that of the _Daily Telegraph_, and it is from those columns that I reprint an epitome of what occurred. I see no better way of presenting the scene as vividly as possible than by doing this, but my readers must understand that I have only made extracts, as the whole proceedings are far too long to be incorporated in a book of this size. And, moreover, I shall only print the record of Mr. Charrington's opposition to the licenses of music halls known by name, then and now, to the great mass of the public. For months he had been obtaining evidence as to the character of these places, and also of similar and less famous ones. In a general picture, such as I wish to present, the cases of the less important halls must be eliminated. It is sufficient to say that the opposition to these minor licenses was as carefully considered, and as earnestly presented, as the objection to the others. I will deal at once with the objection which Mr. Charrington made to the renewal of the licenses to the Empire Theatre of Varieties in Leicester Square. In order to make certain references in the report intelligible to the reader, I must say that one of Mr. Charrington's inspectors--a Mr. Frye--was a grocer by trade. Half the ribald press of London, for many days, constantly referred to this fact. "Mr. Charrington and his Grocer" became a byword in the columns of purely worldly newspapers. It was a cheap enough joke, and I entirely fail to see why a grocer should not be as efficient a critic of morals as any one else. But if Mr. Frye had been a solicitor, a banker, or a vendor of smoked spectacles, through which to look at an eclipse, the comments would have been just the same. Mr. George Edwardes applied for the renewal of the music and dancing license held by the Empire Theatre, Leicester Square. Mr. Charrington: I oppose this license. Mr. Forest Fulton, M.P., who appeared for the applicant, said no notice of opposition had been received. The Chairman asked whether Mr. Edwardes would prefer to have the case adjourned. Major Probyn: I think it exceedingly unfair to applicants not to have had notice of opposition. It is not at all in conformity with English ideas of fair play. Mr. Beachcroft thought that as the option of having the case adjourned was given, there was no case of complaint. The Chairman: The Theatres Committees were not aware of any opposition until this moment. Mr. Forest Fulton said the difficulty of course was that they had no knowledge whatever of the nature of the complaint which was made, whether it was that they were harbouring prostitutes, or allowing indecent songs. The Chairman observed that it was quite as inconvenient to the Committee as it was to the applicant.