STRONG WINE

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 51, 28 August 1914, Page 4

STRONG WINE

OP NEW ZEALAND VINTAGE LICENSING AMENDMENT BILL ATTACKED SOME NEW POINTS OF ISSUE.

The Legislative Council has a habifc of seeing new aspects in legislation which escape the hurried survey of the Lower House, and this was exemplified in the discussion on the Licensing Amendment Biil by the Second Chamber yesterday afternoon. It will be remembered that the Bill was robbed of its great issue in the rejection in Committee by the Lower House of a clause altering the majority required in the licensing question from 60 per cent, to 55 per cent. — this having been carried on the 6econd reading of the Bill. Thia clause was practically all the original Bill, but when the-con-tentious issue went a number of patchwork clauses were tacked on by various members of the House without much debate. Of these new additions the Prime Minister contributed the principal item in a series of sub-clauses regulating the control of wine-making and providing for wine-makers' licenses- Sub-clause 11 defined New Zealand "wine" as "any Hquor being the produce of fruit grown in New Zealand and of a. strength not exceeding 20 per centum of proof spirit." FROM DIFFERENT This was the "strong" wine which annoyed the Hon. George Jones, who compared this 20 per cent, alcoholised beverage with beer, champagne, sherry, and other standard liquors. Other points of the Bill were attacked from opposite sides by the Hon. Mr. Louisson and the Hon. Mr. Ban-, •and the collision of views was interesting. In moving the second reading of the Bill, the Hon. Mr. Bell referred to a series of clauses he had given notice to introduce in Committee as an amendment for the strict regulation of the introduction of liquor into No-license districts. The chief point of the series of clauses was that the carrier of the liquor must deliver it to the purchaser the same day it was introduced into a "dry" district. No person shall sell, snpply, or send any liquor intended to be taken into a No-license except on and in pursuance of the terms of an order signed by a purchaser. The Minister also gave notice of an amendment mak. ing it an offence to sell New Zealand wine of a strength exceeding 20 per cent, of proof spirit. WHY TAKE IT AWAY? « The Hon. C. C. Louisson said there were now apparently three parties to the Liquor Question, but all parties agreed that the law in regard to liquor in Nolicense districts should be obeyed. He regretted that Mr. Seddon's famous clause 9, "No-license, no liquor," had not been carried. (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Mr. Louisson : So"me of the gentlemen now saying "Hear, hear" probably did not say "H«ar, hear" when Air. Seddon introduced the clause. He regarded th 6 present law as to the consumption off the premises of liquor by youths under 21 yeare of age was going too far. Hon. Mi 1 . Bell : You mean the Bill. The Hon. Mi. Louisson '. Yes. It is ridiculous that a person under 21 years of age, perhaps earning his or her living, should be prevented from purchasing liquor' from a wholesale dealer's for household purposes. Isn't it ridiculous to prevent a youth or a young woman bringing home sit penn'orth of beer for a parent who may not be able to leave the house and may be one of those who require liquor, or at any rate like a little now and again? Was a mother of 17, 18 or 19 years of age to be debarred from getting liquor ? Hon. Mr. Bell : She 6hould send her husband. v Hon. Mr. Louisson : He may be under 21 years of age also. (Laughter.) Boys of 20 are allowed io go to the war, but are not , allowed to get a drink. Then you don't want to prevent people get- > ting married early, either. THAT .POTENT BEVERAGE. The Hon. George Jones said there was a good point in the Bill in the attempt to dcraway with the practice of "kegging'' in such places as Invercargill. It. was disgraceful the way brewers had evaded the Act, and the orgies in InvercargUl every week were something shocking to contemplate. Personally, he tooK exception to the clause allowing wine-making for a license fee of £10, as liable to bring about a of affairs worse than kegging. The alcoholic' limit set in the Bill waa 20 per cent. This was extreme. Beer con tamed from 3 per cent, to 6.68 pe,r cent, of alcohol ; champagne, from, 12.56 to 14.4; sherry, from 7.21 to 19.24; French wines, from 10.21 to X 3.76 per cent. They had evidence of the evils of wine shops on the' Continent, and in France the municipalities set up placards cautioning the public against the drinking of alcoholic liquors. He regretted that the majority issue had been removed from the Bill, as he felt sure the general public v/as in favour of a reduction of the majority from 3-sths to 55 per cent. He hoped the Leadet of the Council would .introduce the clause in the Bill. » A CHAMPION OF YOUTH. The Hon. Mr. Barr expressed strong ■exception to. the remarks of the Hon. Mr. Louisson on" the supply or delivery of liquor to youths under twenty-one years. The orgies of lads of seventeen and eighteen and nineteen were disgraceful, puchasing liquor in bulk and taking it to the nearest vacant sectiop and making hogs of themselves. Then there were the youths employed about hotels, youths of seventeen anji eighteen serving in th© bare, and younger lads — the buttons—' helping themselves, as no dbubt they would be tempted to do, carrying liquor about. He had known of too many fine young lads spoilt by such a life. A nation could do no better work than keep its youth strong, wholesome, and clean. The certificated barmaid cure was worse than the original disease. The barmaids were getting from £2 to £3 10s, not so much to dispense liquor as to induce the sale of it. They ought to abolish the barmaid altogether. In Glasgow they had found it absolutely necessary to abolish the barmaid for the sake of the community. He knew the evils personally, as he had been in the liquor trade in Glasgow as a lad. He was informed that the evils in Sydney of barmaids' influence were great, There was any amount of useful work to be done in New Zealand by women.- 'Domestic work was far more honourable than dig. pensing liquors with the lure of sex influence over the bar. THE WHOLE HOG OR NOTHING. 1 Hon.' Mr. - Jones : Rip out tlie drink traffic altogether. Hon. Mr. Barr : There are some people in this country who want the7whole ndg 1 all at once. Take it by degrees. Any step tpvfa-rds a- limitation of the evils will have my support. The Hon. Mr. Beehari agreed that liquors «hould be inspected and examined, but the wine industry should not be discouraged— rather it should be regulated. He suggested that 20 per cent, proof spirits be reduced to 12 per cent, or theieabouts. The "Minister, ia reply, said there was no novelty in the matter about winemakers' licenses. The 20 per cent, omximum of proof spirit wa* contained In the

original Act. The idea was to give the manufacturer of wine the license and make him comply with the law. Personally, he was quite ready to consider the 20 per cent, question. He had heard that wme made from parsnips went up to SO pci 1 cent. Hon. Mr. Jones : Goes to the head. The Minister said he had heard that New Zealand wines were efrrongly alcoholic by nature. Personally, he did not intend to reintroduce the majority issue, howevei much he might agree with the clause rejected m another place, but he honed that members would not press at this stage of politics and affairs aji issue that was distinctly controversial. It did seem reasonable to exclude youths under age from selling liquor as from purchasing it, and he would consider an amendment in that direction. He could not agree to a clause excluding barmaids altogether, though he agreed that it was bad they should be employed. Still, they had been brought up in the trade, and it Avould be injustice to exclude thorn by Act of Parliament. The Bill wae read a second time.