THE LICENSING BILL.

Evening Post, Volume LXVIII, Issue 97, 21 October 1904, Page 7

THE LICENSING BILL.

.VIGOROUS OPPOSITION TO CLUB CLAUSES. A LIVELY DEBATE. PROGRESS IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. During yesterday afternoon the Licensing Bill came on for further consideration in the Legislative Council, and a good deal of progress was made. The Attor-ney-General stuck solidly to the Bill, and steered it through the day's sitting intact, with the exception of some additions p in the clause respecting prohibited persons, which were agreed to without dissent. There was an unusual number of spectators in the galleries, especially in the evening, when the club clauses were under discussion; and the members of the House of Representatives wer-e present in considerable force . The keenest interest was manifested in the debate and tsi© division, which, ia spite of vigorous opposition on the part of the champions of the clubs, resulted in the clause being retained by a maTgin of one vote. The discussion was resumed at clause 46, dealing with prohibited persons. • PROHIBITED PERSONS. While he admitted that the .clause was a step in the right direction, the ' Hon. J. Rigg questioned whether the present law was successful. Prohibited persons were able to get as much liquor as they liked so long as they had mpney enough to buy it with. He was doubtful whether it would! ever be possible to prevent a prohibited person from' getting drink. Perhaps the identificatory system of photograph distribution might solve the problem. The Hon. G. Jones regarded the suggestion, as an indication, that the only cure' for the evil was the abolition of liquor. A defence of prohibition, orders as a power for good was set up by the Attor-ney-General. He did not agree with tho Hon. G. Jones's views. How were they going to prevent prohibited persons obtaining liquor unless they made stringent restrictions? Hon. G. Jones : Abolish it ! The Attorney-General : Impossible 1 It will always exist, and you cannot abolish it. The Hon.G. Jones rejoined that the failure of this colony to regulate the drink traffic was evidence of the impossibility'of controlling it. The Attorney-General then moved to amend that section of the clause, which provides "that the fact of a prohibited person drinking loquor or having it in Ms possession" shall be evidence of his having committed a breach of the law, by inserting tho words "being found" before "drinking." This was agreed to. He then moVed that the provisions regarding prohibition orders should also extend to railway refreshment rooms as well as hotels. The amendment was agreed to. The Hon. H. Feldwick moved to amend the clause by the addition of a sub-clause providing that a person who applies for a prohibition order against himself can have it granted otherwise than in open Court. The amendment received warm support, and was agreed to. Another amendment was moved by the Hon. H. Feidwick that when any person has been thrice convicted of drunkenness within six months; the Magistrate may forthwith, of his own -initiative, issue a prohibition order against him. This amendment was also agreed to, and the clause aa amended was passed. A SYMPOSIUM ON GAMBLING. A definition of gambling and unlawful games was asked for by the Hons. F. Arkwright and E. C. J. Stevens when clause 47 (prohibiting gambling and unlawful games on licensed premises) was reached. Mr. Stevens said that the definitions should be very carefully made. He had it on good authority that euchre and whist were lawful games, while poker was unlawful. As to bridge whist, it was hard to say what it was. But people should not be left to discover •whether a game was lawful or unlawful merely by the decision of a Court. He urged that the Legislature should d6ime which were > unlawful games, and pointed out that, as fan-tan and pak-a-poo had been so defined in explicit terms, there was no reason why the other unlawful games should not be defined. The Hon. F. Arkwright moved to strike out "gambling" from the clause, so as to leave only "unlawful games." This course the Attorney-General was inclined to adopt if the last speaker would move his amendment so as to substitute "guming" for "gambling." He did not know whether there was any difference between "gaming" and "gambling," but certain games were declared unlawful in tre Gaming and Lotteries Act. It would be rather a difficult task to name all the unlawful games individually, as a number of them might not be known. There was quite sufficient in that Act to enable the Court to decide whether any particular game was lawful or not. The Hon. C. C. Bowen imagined that the word "gambling" had been put in the clause in order that dangerous gamblers might not tave the opportunity of operating in a publichouse, which was a public place, and open to every sort of character. This reflection, he considered, suggested another argument against the absurdity of treating clubs as if they were hotels, whereas they were really on the same footing as private houses. ihe amendment was lost by 19 votes to 11. At Clause 48 (making persons, other than the licensee, who actually supply liquor liable in certain offences), the Hon. C. Louisson moved to add harbouring constables and permitting gambling and drunkenness to the list of offences. Eventually the amendment was withdrawn, and the clause, with a verbal alteration, was agreed to. At Clause 52 (which proposes to make it illegal for the owner or tenant of any licensed premises to demand or receive any consideration for consent to the transfer of the premises or the license), the Hon. J. Rigg moved to substitute "landlord or tenant" for "owner or landlord," but the amendment was lost. FIGHI ON THE CLUB CLAUSES. What had from the first been looked forward tc as like-ly to cause trouble — viz., the club clauses, were then reached. At the first of these clauses, which practically proposes that, as far as selling liquor and permitting gambling Is concerned, clubs shall come under the operation of the Licensing Acts, The Hon. S. T. George said members of clubs objected very strongly to having their clubs classed as publichouses, and he predicted that the passing of tie clauses would result in a widespread series of resignations of club members; and those resignations would prevent the dubs from making both ends meet. There was no doubt that the clauses were put in the Bill at the request of "The Trade"— that is,' not the brewers, but the publicans. He could not understand how the Premier had made such a tactical blunder, as there were 20,000 club members, whom the clauses would irritate, and whose votes they would no doubt influence. He moved to amend the clause (whicii provides that the closing hours of the clubs shall coincide with those of publichouses) by permitting clubs to remain open from 6 a.m. to midnight, except on Sundays. He would not object, however, to 11 p.m. being substituted for midnight.

The Attorney-General said that if the amendment were carried it would place the Council in a very invidious position, as the amendment was bo constructed as to cut out the prohibition against gambling in clubs. He was not surprised that the hotelkoepers wanted the clubs closed, as they had to pay fees and rents while the clubs sold liquor after they ■ themselves had to close. The Hoif. F. Arkwright admitted that there nwght be objections in some cases to allowing clubs to remain open for the sale of liquor, on. Sundays or when the hotek as-e closed, but he thought it very unfair and_ very treasonable to prevent club members playing & game of cards or game of billiards' after 11 o'clock. THE WELLESGTO-N WORKING -MEN'S CLUB. The Hon. G. Jones faileji to see much difference between a club and a hotel, and enquired why, if the profits on the sale of .liquor were so small, the clubs troubled to sell liquor^ at all. Referring to Mr. George's prophecy regarding the alienation of dub members' votes, he thought that the loss of the 20,000 "clubbista" would gam the support of a more than compensating number of others. Much had been, said of the excellence of working men's clubs, but he had received a letter from a life member of the Wellington Working Men's Club, who had stated that when the hour of closing hotels was reduced, there was a very large influx into the ranks of the club members, who increased from 800 to 1100, and then the lists were closed. The writer of the letter had gone on to state that members pa*a no attention to anything but the bar. With them it had .b^en "Bar first" and "Bar last."< If an official tried to put down' 'drunkenness he'" incurred the hostility of f th,e committee and was eventually expelled. The sight 'in the club when the hotels were closed was a sight to'see, but the spectacle on Sundays was' the worst of aIL " Old members of the club had/ openly regretted that the club had been begun, for instead of fulfilling its original promise of being a potential moral agency, it had degenerated very far, indeed. The Hon. J. Rigg deprecated the holding up of the Wellington Working Men's Club as an "awful example." Tne people who complained of the conduct were people who knew nothing about it. The letter quoted by the last speaker was quite obviously the work of a man with a grievance, who, to vent his spleen, had written in a manner in which no selfrespecting man would write. He (Mr. Rigg) had belonged to the club for many years, and ifc was very well conducted, indeed. Its conduct was even stricter now than it had been, and he could not understand the complaints about it. With respect to tlie clause, he saw no proper cause for it. The real reason for its introduction, was a desire to influence the votes of club members, and, by applying to tuem the "no liquor, no license" principle of tJie famous Clau&e 9, to lead them not to vote No-license. Yet he was sure ifc would fail for the same reason as Clause 9 had* failed : people would not be coerced. The Hon. G. Jones returned to the charge i again concerning the letter about the Wellington Club. The letter had been written, by a man with a heart — a man with some feeling. The fact was, people were becoming so used to drunkenness tht the pity of it was lost upon them. High-class oi low-class, 'the clubs were all drinking shops. The Hxm. S. <T . George rose to a piint of order, and asked whether Mr. Jones should not lay the letter on the table or disclose the name of the writer. "It will remain in my popket," said Mr. Jones. The Chairman intimated that it was not possible to force Mr. Jones to dis .close the name, but that his action in reading the letter and suppressing the name, of the writer was injudicious and unparliamentary. The Hon. T. K. Macdonald declared that the Hon. G. Jones had been talking nonsense, and that his statements had been absolutely incorrect. It \vas> an improper thing to cast on 50,000 club members such a stigma as to say that their clubs were drink shops. It was " the greatest tactical blunder the present Government had ever made to interfere with the personal" privileges and comforts of 20,000 adults in the colony. Had clubmen a right to be treated as Russian serfs? Why should they be told that they should not be allowed to drink in tlieir own house? The Government had no more right to interfere with them and pass laws about them than they had to pass laws enacting that at such and such an hour a man shall close his private residence and cease eating and drinking within. The whole proposal was an interference With the liberty of the subject. The Government was playing up to "the "namby-pamby" party and the Prohibitionists, and it would be whipped with scorpions in the days to come. WHO INSPIRED THE CLAUSES? The frequent allusions to the " tactical blunders 4 ' of the Government stirred the Attorney-General to speech. He commented on the fa>ct that the Government had been charged with introducing the clauses in the intere&ts of both the liquor party and the Prohibitionist party. Did not that fact give further proof that the clauses had been introduced ir> the interests of the great moderate party — that the Government had, in fact, steered a middle course ? The Working Men's Club' had so largely increased in membership and in the sale of liquor that the time had surely come when an effort should be made to regulate them. The present proposals were the outcome of a sound public opinion, and the Govferntqent had aimed at enacting a measure in the interests of the colony. It merely aimed at regulating the sale of liquor, and did not propose to close the clubs. That was an absurd contention. Save in the matter of liquor and unlawful games they were absolutely unrestricted. In reply^to the Hon. E. G. J. Stevens, who 'suggested that the police could enter a club, the Attorney-General stated th^t there was nothing in the proposals of the Bill to alter the method of inspection laid down by the 1893 Act, and that nobody could enter a club save an inspector appointed by the Colonial Secretary. THE CLAUSES SURVIVE. On a division, the Hon. 3. T. George's amendment was lost by 17 votes to 16. The division list was as follows: — Ayes : BaJdey? Bolt, Carncross, Gouiley, Harris, Holmes, Jenkinson, Jones, Mahuta, Marshall, Pinkerton, Pitt, A. L. Smith, W. C. Smith, Thompson, Trask, and Twomey. Noes : Arkwright, Baillie, Beeban, Bovren, Feld-srick, George, T. Kelly, Louisson, Macdonald, M'Lean, Miller, Ormond, Rigg, Scotland, Stevens, and Williams. An amendment to another section of the clause, moved by the Hon. J. Rigg in order that the Ashburton Club might carry on until the next election, was lost by 21 votes to 10. The Hon. C. Louisson, who, by the defeat of the Hon. S. T. George's amendment, lost his chance of moving an amendment (of which he had given natice) relieving clubs of the restrictions of the licensing laws as far as gambling and unlawful games are concerned, moved to delete a subsection which provided that gambling or the playing of an unawful game should render a club charter liable to cancellation by the Colonial Secretary. The amendment was lost on the voices, and a debate ensued on the clause as a whole, which, with verbal amendments, Was agreed to by 18 votes to 13. Progress was then reported, and the Council rose at 11.4b p.m.