THE LICENSING BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12409, 23 October 1903, Page 6

THE LICENSING BILL.

ITS PROBABLE FATE. SOME WELLINGTON' OPINIONS. [lit TELEGRAPH.— COBRESrONDENT.] Wellington', Thursday.

Members are wondering whether the ] Licensing Bill is to be proceeded with this * session, and, if so, how long the session is likely to last. The prevailing impres- . sion seems to be that if the Bill passes its ; second reading, which is not altogether a i certainty, it will get one night in commit- > tee, and if its opponents make anything like . a good start at stonewalling it will not be heard of again this session. The clause to which most exception seems to be taken is the proposal to give mayors and chairmen of county councils seats ex j officio on the licensing bench. In some ! cases there would be several mayors or i . chairmen oa the licensing bench, and in j I others only one. The Premier states the ! extreme case as being one in which there | would be five elective members and four lex officio members on the committee. Then there is the objection that- the liquor question would be brought into mayoral and I county council elections. ] The Prohibition part-- is apparently divided on the question of whether the erasure of the reduction issue at no-license polls is a good or bad thing. Both the Wellington papers refer to the Bill in terms of condemnation. Mr. H. J. Williams, secretary of the Licensed Victuallers' Association, asked bow "the trade" viewed the Bill, replied that it had not yet been considered by his association, and consequently he preferred not to criticise it too closely. "There are some good points about it, and there are also some bad ones." He added: More than that I cannot say at present." With regard to the proposal that itshould be illegal for any person to have liquor in his possession in a no-license district, the Rev. F. W. Isitt, who maj be taken as speaking the mind of the Prohibition party on this subject, says the prohibitionists have never asked for interference with the private habits of temperate people, but only that the public sale of liquor should be prohibited. Further, he says, the motive behind the proposal is to assist the trade and defeat the purposes of the temperance party. He objects to the referendum on the period of the local option polls on the ground that the trade has under it everything to gain and nothing to lose. Of some of the details of the Bill Mr. Isitt gives his approval, but on the whole he takes the general prohibition view that the Bill as a whole is bad.

MEETING AT WANGANUI. [ET TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION.] Wanganci, Thursday. At a public meeting of temperance sympathisers to-night the new Licensing Bill was strongly condemned, and a resolution was carried unanimously protesting against the provisions for the "Mayors of

joroug'ne and chairmen of counties to be ex iffioio members of licensing committees, makng it possible for liquor-dealers to be ?lected to tit upon the Licensing Bench; raking away the power of the people to vote :o reduce licenses without, restoring discretionary powers to licensing committees, increasing the number of liquor bars, attempting to extend the time between the taking of :he local option vote, and attempting to force prohibition to a degree never contemplated by the no-license party, and exceeding the right of the Legislature to interfere with the private habits of the people. OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. [BY TELEGRAPH. OWN correspondent.] Christchttrch, Thursday. Of the Christehurch papers, the Opposition press is much more favourable to the Premier's Licensing Bill than the Government supporter, the Lyttelton Times. The Press remarks that the Premier has falsified the predictions of some of his critics by bringing down a Licensing Bill, although by deferring it till this late period ' i>f th? session he certainly gives colour to ! the surmise that he is not very anxious j to see it on the Statute Book. Unless he ! makes it a Government measure and forces it through under the lash of the whip, which we should say is unlikely, the chances are that both sides, after a preliminary discussion, will prefer to postpone the big fight until next session. The abolition of the reduction alternative will simplify the voting, says the Press, and " in our opinion is a distinct improvement. The reduction issue was merely a convenient halting place for -kneed voters with no very pronounced opinions, and if it were earned simply benefited the holders of licenses that were spared without materially advancing the cause of temperance." With regard to the penalty on persons who are found with liquor in their possession in a proliibition district, and the forfeiture of the liquor, which is to be handed over to the local hospital board, the latter provision strikes the Press as rather quaint, "We hope," it adds, "that the quality of the liquor will be tested before it is administered in the shape of medical comforts to the hospital patients. As to its being made an offence for liquor to be found in the possession of any private person, we object to it as an undue interference with the liberty of the subject and the privacy of his house ; but there is no question that it is carrying the views of the prohibitionists to a logical conclusion." The paper continues: "In addition to the main issue of ' license' or ' no-license,' another question will be submitted to the electors at the same time, although on a separate voting-paper. They will be asked to say whether the licensing poll shall be taken with every succeeding electoral poll or every alternate electoral poll.. We do not object to any plan which would lessen the turmoil and unrest produced by such frequent anneals to the people on the licensing question, and no objection can be offered to the plan of allowing the people themselves to say whether they wish the poll to be taken every three years, or only every six years. It will be curious to see how it works out. We fancy that each side will feel a little nervous in voting foi an extension of the time, unless it feels sure that it is going to win on the main issue. A decided improvement on the present law _ is contained in the clauses which provide that publicans shall be licensed as well as their premises. The Bill on the whole is a distinct improvement _ on the existing law in matters wherein it requires amendment." The Times, under the heading, "A Legislative _ Masterpiece," says: "The Licensing Bill is indeed a marvellous measure. We suppose it must be treated seriously, but the Premier can hardly contemplate its passage this side of the New Year. he people of the colony have certainly never asked for such a comprehensive amendment of the existing law. If Mi. Seddon's Bill aimed at a consolidation of the law, the reasonable amendment of bad I clauses, and the removal of anomalies, j there would be some justification for its | appearance, but almost every clause of the new Bill raises a big issue of its own. We I have not yet. had time to examine every section closely, but the outstanding features j are really ludicrous. There is a proposal ' to abolish the valuable reductior issue at licensing polls, the bare question whether I licenses shall or shall not be granted being submitted to the people. Then Mr. Sedidon has carried out his threat, and has included a provision making the mere possession of liquor in a no-license district, a punishable offence The proposal is simply calculated to make a farce of our whole licensing system. _ By way of meeting the trade representatives, who have been demanding a six-year tenure, the Premier proposes to submit to a referendum at next general election the question whemer the licensing poll shall be taken at every electoral poll, or at each alternate electoral poll. We cannot, perhaps, quarrel with the principle of submitting the question to the people, but the proposal to extend the period between the polls is not to be tolerated for a moment. The passage of this clause would mean a fiercer fight on the licensing question than New Zealand has yet experienced. The proposals for the reorganisation of the licensing committees again are absurd in the extreme. If carried the} would mean that the licensing issue would be fought at every mayoral and

county council election. In a score of minor clauses we raeeb with utterly undemocratic suggestions. The periodical purging of the rolls for some occult reason is to be abolished. Another ludicrous proposal is that in certain cases licensed houses ordered by a committee to be extensively repaired or rebuilt, should be given an absolute six-years license regardless of the determination of the electors. Only a master hand could have framed the new scheme for native licensing districts, and the proposed issue of permits to tourists to buy liquor is worthy of Mr. Gilbert himself. A few gleams of reason do 'shine through the mass of darkness atid verbiage, but in its main provisions the Bill is hopelessly bad." [BY TELEGBATH. —SPECIAL CORKESrOXDEN'T.] Wellington, Thursday. The Times, in a leading article on the Licensing Bill, "The Poor "Orphan Bill," as it calls it, says: " Th« Premier stated that. when the Licensing Bill came down it would neither please the "trade'' nor the prchi'.: t-ionists. Now that the measure is before us we must confess he has excelled himself and pleased no one. This orphan Bill is a weakling, and is of a piebald character. There are patches of strong " trade" colour, others again of deepest prohibition dye. The positive and negative nullify each other, hence no result. There are colours that will not blend, mix them as you will, and although spirits and waiter in proper proportion act as a stimulant, there can be no legislative enactment which will gratify both trade- and prohibitionist. Their views, aspirations, demands and requirements are as opposite as the two poles, and both parties in some r&speots are selfish and seek to obtain too much. The Bill goes to extremes, both for trade and prohibition, and therefore neither party can reasonably be expected to take in the waif and give it shelter. The simple reason is that the Premier, in trying to please moderates, has produced a thing that is neither fish, flesh, nor red herring, but a mixture of all three. Every fair-minded person will sympathise with the " trade," seeing it is to b« further hedged round with conditions, which by far outweigh relief otherwise provided. Freedom of contract is denied. A young man of IS is no*' to b© served with a glass of beer. A man the worse for liquor, who had just walked oft" the street into a hotel, is presumed to have been made drunk on the premises, and persons found on premises after closing hours are to be lia-blo to punishment. If the friends of a hotelkeeper pay him a visit, on Sunday a breach of the law has been committed. For the hotelkeeper, his lot, like that of the constable, is not a happy one. . . . i Had the measure provided straight out that the liquor poll should be every six years, the orphan Bill would have found many friends, and had it provided that a proper judicial tribunal should be established in lieu of the : partisan committees now existing, further j support would have been accorded, but in- : stead of this, the only alteration is that , mayors and county chairmen are ex officio tc be members of committees. "What better would the Wellington Licensing Committee be with the present Mayor, Mr. Aitken, added? The only change for the better so far as the committee is concerned is that the chairman who is a stipendiary magistrate, is to be supreme on all point.? of law that arise. The abolition of the reduction vote is an improvement, but it is not a special concession to the trade, seeing that all parties agree that it is an excrescence on our liquor law. The Bill provides that discretion be ?iven to magistrates as to endorsement of I licenses. This is the natural outcome of j public opinion, and every Prohibitionist I favours conditionally this reasonable power ! being granted. In one respect only has the [Premier fully sustained his public utterances —the Bill provides that, in districts where there are no licenses, plutocrat and plebeian shall be treated alike, and if workers cannot j get beer at hotels, well-to-do people shall not j keep at their homos stock" of choicest bl w >ds ' of spirits or sparkling champagne. The ! proposal to grant separate licenses to hotel- i keepers and hotel premises is novel and of questionable character, intended no doubt i as a sop to hotelkeepers. The abolition of i bottle licenses, placing restrictions on per- ' sons holding wholesale licenses, limiting the number of bars, bringing clubs under inspection, and closing of clubs where no-license has been carried, arc important, concessions to prohibitionists. The treating of the King Country as a " no-license" dip-rict, and prevention of lapsed licenses being granted as : new licenses to premises in any part of the electorate are also sops to the prohibition Cerberus. The inclusion in the Bill of the j English law penalising persons found on licensed premises after closing hours was J also cie«red by the temperance pari v. They I have got something substantial, much more I than the trade, but like Oliver Twist they will 'ask for more, and the orphan Bill is sure of rough treatment at their Iwik'i, and > as previously asserted, neither party will i take in or give shelter to the waif. It is i well known that the power in the land re- j specimg the licensing question is the mode- ' rate section of the community. After con- ' nmg and scanning the weakling from head 1 to toe, it is difficult to find in it that vi- ' tality whicn will stand the combined attack : of interested parties. restrictions in ' respect to trade and the non-granting of all that Prohibitionists have expected, warrant i the assumption that the orphan will have a hard struggle to pass the second stage of its paltry existence." °