LICENSING BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 271, 15 November 1910, Page 7

LICENSING BILL.

APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL.

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Bepcrter.)

WELLINGTON, Monday. ! The licensing Bill came Ibefore the Legislative Council to-night, when the I Attorney-General (Hon. Dr. lindlxy) moved tie second reading. Iβ outlining its proposals, he said the measure contained the democratio principle that in matters concerning the people as a whole the people ac a whole should be consulted. The reduction issue having already served its purpose, had been eliminated, and it had been felt <by those who 'had the interest* of no-licence at iheart that it tended to create, if not a monopoly, an unearned increase in the value of existing licensed houses, which ■were selling ac much liquor as previously. The cardinal principle of the bill -was the issue of national prohibition, -with the consequent issue of whether drnk should be permitted at all in the Dominion or not. The bill aleo aimed at the suppressioii oi the locker system, which had been the source wf very great evils, and he proposed to move a further amendment, to check those evils above and beyond the provisions of this 'bill. Aleo he proposed to move an amendment to prevent people using the courts to defeat the intention and provisions of 'the bill. He hoped that no one would use that as a basis for resisting the passing of the bill. Hon. J. E. Jenkinson: "Do wn*t is right." The Attorney-<3«neral: "That will be doing "what is right." A* to the issues to be put before the voters, he eaid they were designed to enable the greatest number of people to validly vote as they wished to vote.

The Hon. G. Jones, in seconding the motion, congratulated tlhe AttorneyGeneral on the epeecS he had made on this remarkable piece of legislation. It was not necessary to say much on each a subject. The "necessity for a radical change in our liquor laws became more apparent day t>y day. Both sidee regarded the bill with a certain amount of favour. He himself did not co much mind the retention of the three-frfthe majority required to obtain local option, but he thought it wae too much to ask that such a majority should lie required ■before they could obtain national prohibition. There were concessions on 'both sides, but he thought thalt the Liquor party gained a great concession in the four years' interval and in the elimination of the reduction vote, while the Xo-license party gained something by the prohibition of the barmaid. Hβ did not care what either side had gained by this bill, but- he welcomed it because it recognised the principle that the people had a right to TUle, and -feat drink in iteelf is a curse. The Hon. W. Carncrose said he d»d not know that he had ever seen a licensing Bill approached in a spirit of such rea-uona-blenesa and conciliation as this ibill had been approached by the House, and the result that they had a measure; which was a great advance in the way of reform. As a moderate men he regarded the bill as being abeohitely a reformation in the conduct oi «re liquor traffic. In this connection he thought that Pir Joseph Ward had never received sufficient credit for the reform he had brought a>bout years ago by abolishing the sale of liquor at railway stations. The Hon. J. B. Callan said there were two features of the bill which appealed to him, the abolition of. barmaids and the retention of the three-fifths majority. As to the latter, he remarked that a permanent change from a very old custom could not have 'been brought about by a bare majority. ' The Hon. C. M. Luke also referred to the extreme moderation displayed by both sides, a moderation which argued well for the future. He believed the 'bill was a credit to the Government, as showing its endeavour to meet the growing demands of the people of New Zealand. He particularly welcomed the abolition of barmaids, and the provision that no young man under the age of 21 years should be served with liquor. As to the four years period of grace, he thought that it was only fair that the trade should have time to adjust their affairs, but he 'was not so sure about the provision under which restoration would take place in three months.

Hrrn. (I. .Innes: "You needn't ■worry about that, you'll never see restoration ■with a three-fiiths majority.' /

The Attorney-Cieneral, implying to a debate which lasted only an hour, said the spirit oi compromise to which reference had been made was due to the full ventilation of the question, and each side had «>me to recognise fchat the inevitable will of the people should be aought, and that each side recognised that it had to submit to the will oi the people. In New Zealand we had come to see that the minority must submit to tli* will of the majority. Thi» -was one of the biggest strides that had been made towards getting the direct and effective vok* of the people on the subject oi national •prohibition. The prohibitiomste, he thought, had Known considerable wisdom in agreeing to the four years period of license after national prohibition -was carried, because many a man would vote for a reform to take place in four years, ■w-hernaa he would vote against, if it were to take place in a shorter period. As to the barmaid, he said he had had a long career nt the bar, aoid lie had never known one case in which the respondent had ever been a -barmaid. In New Zealand women who had acted in that capacity showed as much fidelity to their promises and to their duty as did any class of women in the community.

The second readmjr was agreed to on the voices, and it* committal was set down for the next day.