"Tied" Publichouses.

Hastings Standard, Issue 349, 16 June 1897, Page 4

"Tied" Publichouses.

There is a law in Victoria designed to strike at the evil of " tied houses" in the liquor trade, but it does not seem to be altogether effective. Section 46 of the Licensing Act of 1890 prescribes that one person shall not be allowed to have a " beneficial interest" in more than one license at a time. The fact that, despite this, many of the Victorian hotels belong to brewers, who also hold bills of sale over the furniture used by the licensees, is well known. The question of how to remedy this state of matters was discussed from a legal aspect by a deputation representing the Victorian Alliauce and the Temperance Committee of the Presbyterian Assembly, that waited upon* the Acting-Premier the other day. The maia point raised by the deputation was whether the brewers did not also share in the profits of the business done in stich places ; whether, in fact, the licensees were not in many cases mere agents or dummies who aided in a wholesale evasion of the law. The President of the Alliance expressed a decided comiction that the law was being travelled to a very serious- extent. He asked whether anything could be done to immediately prevent this, pending an alteration in the Act to make its operation more effective. The solicitor for the Alliance testified that there were often abuses of the law empowering the Licensing Court, in cases where licensees deserted their premises or came into dispute with tho proprietors of the hotel, to appoint Iresii licensees nominated by the

owners. The Acting-Premier asked for instances of brewers who had a beneficial share in hotel licenses, but the deputation declined to give any, though it intimated that many might be cited. It was not its purpose to act as informer ; to find out such eases and take action upon them was the duty of the police. The Acting-Premier could only promise to consider the matter, and consult with the Minister in charge of licensing affairs. The facts disclosed show the difficulty of preventing evasions of the law forbidding the owning of more than one publichouse, or an interest in more than one publichouse, or an interest in more than one such establishment by brewers, and they point to the complete monoply of the liquor trade by the State as affording the only reasonable guarantee for the effective control of a difficult business.