THE LIQUOR PROBLEM.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 10785, 12 October 1900, Page 5

THE LIQUOR PROBLEM.

OPINIONS W-Tflß NEW LICENSING —- I BILL. • .

VIEWS OF INTEREST.

(dt ot;b sfecial Skpoeteb.)

It is a ticklish thing to bring in a l/iquor Bill nowadays. Feeling on the par>J*' the extreme interests, the publican aad prohibition parties, runs high, and the person, introducing a measure amending the licensing laws is usually in the unhappy position of a buffer between the contending and conflicting interests. Occasionally, too, he draws down on himself the combined wrath of both parties. Then he -is still less jiappy. This latter contingency appears to have occurred, to- some extent, in connection with the Licensing Bill just introduced by Sir Seddon. News from Wellington yesterday indicated that the Rev. F. W. Isitt, who may be taken to voice th& views of the prohibitionists, was strongly opposed to some of the provisions of the measure ; while simultaneously came word. that the publican party were also very dissatisfied. "The brewers have been handed over to the wolves" was the plaintive cry of one of the publicans interviewed, while Mr Isitt regarded the abolition of local and substitution of provincial option as the chief drawback. Curiously enough, one of the agreed that provincial option ''was too risky."

Seeing the reception the Bill had received in Wellington, a "Press" representative called on leading membere of the conflicting interests here, to ascertain their views on the subject. Bishop Julius was interviewed, a member of the Licensing Bench, a leading publican or two, and also a couple of prohibitionists'. Unfortunately, the latter declined to commit themselves until they had seen the full text of the Bill, but they left very'little, doubt in the mind of the interviewer as to their probable ultimate decision. They were "agin" it or what they had seen of it. Mr Carl, president of the Licensed Victuallers', Association, also declined to say anything concerning the Bill until the Association had discussed the matter. The opinions of those who re-jponded to our representative's request are given balow. BISHOP JULIUS.

Bishop Julius was at Bishopscourt when called on, and courteously consented to undergo the ordeal of cross-esuminatian. He did not know the full contents of the ijlij, ho explained, but he had read the summary published in the "Press."

liaxl no noticed the proposal to substitute provisional for local option? "Oh, yes.' . And his .opinion on it'! "Yes, he had an opinion." "1 think that as against local option, whicii will give prohibition a better oiiaiice oi being tried on its merits. That is," with a smile, "it it ever lias a chance oi being carried.' "Do you Hunt its chance is improved by the ciiange:" "I shouia taink its chance of being carried is probably "made more remote.' .

"WHap abuut emor,cing provincial prohibition:" queried the inquisitor. "Do you think it would be more, or .ess, easily enforced than local prohibition?"

"1 dou r t thinlc it would be as easy to enforce. I take it that the weakness' of prohibition ia that you cannot eniorce it in any particular locality where a majority or a very large per centage of the people are opposed to it. For instance, supposing the country carried prohibition as against the town. Or take another case. Take the province of Canterbury. Supposing prohibition was carried owing, to South Canteroury voting solid and being assisted by a minority in North Canterbury. It would be a very difficult thing to enforce prohibition among the majority opposed to it in ilorth Canterbury. Furthermore," his Lordship added, "when you have one district in which prohibition is carried, surrounded by non-prohibited districts, it is almost impossible to keep liquor out."

Asked as to whether iie had considered any other effects of the Bill, Bishop Julius briefly responded in the affirmative. "Yes. fir tell you what I think about the Lul, or isuch of it, as I have seen, in oilier respects. --I think that the opportunity given, of deciuing that the vote on the ouostioh of prohibition shall be taken

every six instead of every three years will be very valuable. -I doubt whether tho triennial disturbance gives any well-disposed publican a prot»3r chance. His position is never safe. I don't think the present position is lair to him or good for the country."

"Anu what about the issues to be submitted on the ballot papers?"

"I feel very keenly the injustice of the form of local option that does not allow one to express one's mind," continued his Lordship, warming to the subject. "I, and many with mc, do not want prohibition, but are driven to vote ' no license' because we cannot conscientiously vote for a continuance of the present system. And now our case is made harder, for we have not the opportunity o: voting for reduction. Whoever the Bil'i. may satisfy, it does not satisfy men who think with mc that State control is the best remedy one can find for the existing condition of things." On the cfetails of the Bill the Bishop did not care to dwell at "any length until he had seen the measure itself. He, however, expressed the opinion that no amendment of the law could be satisfactory that did not provide for penalising the house as well as the licensee for the time, bsing for breaches of the law. Frequently the licensee was but the creature of the proprietor, and the effect. of the penalty was minimised by it merely resulting in a change of licensees. If the penalty were placed on the house as well as on the, licensee, an improved class of hotelkeapers would result,_and, in consequence, tew-iT breaches of the law. • MEMBERS OF THE LICENSING COMMITTEE. As one bound to neither the publican, nor the prohibition, nor any other party, Mr S. S. Blackburne, a member of the Christchurch Licensing Bench, was approached for his opinion on the- proposals of the proposed enactment, and talcing the precis of the measure telegraphed from Wellington as his text, gave his views on the various proposals indicated therein. The extension of the districts in wihich the option vote is to be taken is, he considered, a .good thing, as there was a liability, when prohibition was carried in a small district, of liquor being obtained close by. The larger districts would also reduce the bitterness of local feeling on the qiustion. Referring to licensing benches as at present constituted, he pointed out that though the numb;r of members liad been reduced from the original strength, the number constituting a quorum had been, by an oversight probably, retained. In view of the difficulty scQietimeiT'expeTienced in getting the required quorum, and the serious consequences that might result to the licensees in a district, he considered that the quorum should' bs reduced proportionAtely to the reduction made in the number of the members of the Bench.

It "was, in his opinion, a mistake to do away with the ''reduction" vote; indeed, he was in favour of four issues being placed before the electors —continuance, reduction, inciease,' and abolition. There was no provision, in the event of the population of a district increasing, for a corresponding increase in the licenses, and it- was only reasonable that tbe electors should have th& risjitt to demand an increase. With respect to" both reduction and increase, a certain limit should be fixed, and a certain percentage of reduction on increases should take place according to which, issue was carried. With regard to the electors deciding whether tits result-of the should remain in force for either three or six years, he did not think this was a g<jod provision, and he contended that, the -period should ba fixed by the Legislature: If was hardly a reasonable thing to give the party at the time being in the ascendant to decide the matter practically for the. following six yeai-s. He saw*no good in the proposal; on the other hand, it was probable that it wou'd confuse the issues. It might just as well be enacted that at the general elections for members of the House of Representatives, the electors should signify whether the party with a majority should remain in office for three or six years I

The proposals respscting Clutha seemed to him to be impracticable. Clutha should be included in the larger district, and he saw no reasonable ground for making it otherwise; exceptions of this nature were i>ot deSinvble. He thought that convictions against the house should tell equally with convictions against the licensee, as there was an obligation cast- on the owners of houses to see that they got satisfactory people to conduct them. Supposing there wero two or three licensees of j any one house during the period, and in the case of two of them being convicted he considered their convictions ought to accumulate, against the house. ~ Tha provision regarding a 'fair start being given to a licensee if there is not more than one endorsement within twelve months from the last endorsement, ho considered the period was too short. Hew*, in his opinion, a bad licensee who had more than one conviction in a year; m fact,_ ne saw no reason for the provision tor »«. "wiping out" of endorsements, and pointed out that in the case of persons charged with other offences, the question of pie vious convictions always entered into the decision respecting the nature of the.punishment awamcu.. He held that threecog victions against a license* should disqualify him, and the tame number iould disqualify tho house fhe Legislature should, in his °P^ on \ * ia ™ finite stated that no house should remain opsn after eleven o'clock. Ten o'clock was quite long enough for country houses, and 10.30 o'clock for town houses It was a bad provision that which practically made it possible for a Committee to permit a house to remain open after eleven o clock. The amendments of the law in the direc lion of abolishing "tied houses" had his approval, as did also the provision prohibiting the Wholesale sale of mixed parcels, and that brindngdubsunder the Licensing Act was also excellent, as he contended that wherever liquor was sold the house should come under the licensing Acts He not see the reason for declaring that prosecution under.the licensing laws should be commenced within twenty-one days, and pointed out that in all other offences prosecutions can be commenced before the expiry of much longer periods. Sufficient evidence might not be obtainable in twenty-one days, and a psrson, by managing to keep quiet for three weeks might avoid the consequences of offences for which he ought properly to be prosecuted.