LIQUOR LAW REFORM.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 4121, 5 June 1874, Page 3

LIQUOR LAW REFORM.

EDITED BY THE HON. WILLIAM FOX, M.H.R. [The Editor of this journal is not responsible for the opinions herein expressed. The column is solely under the charge of its special Editor.] A VERY COOL REQUEST. We clip the following choice passage from a leading article in one of the Colonial journals, in which the editor is commenting on a verdict of a coroner's jury, at Auckland, on a death which it is alleged occurred through drinking adulterated spirit : —" We do more than suggest, we assert positively, that if the Good Templars, the British Templars, the Rechabites, the Sons and Daughters of Temperance, or whatever they like to call themselves, would commence a crusade, not against all strong drink, but against some of the villainous compounds that are retailed, they would do more good in one year than they are likely to effect iu a generation, laboring as they now do. They would havo the active and moral support of a large class of persons who now stand aloof from them because of the extremity to which they push matters. If their real object be to restrain drunkenness and narrow it down, this is the way they should go to work, and cease to be like children crying for the moon that they will never get." This certainly is most modest. AVhat does the writer propose ? Simply that the total abstainers are to abandon their^crusade against the liquor traffic, and become a sort-of bottle washers for that part of the community which indulges in strong drink. On the part of the humble orders referred to, we beg to decline the pleasing duty which the editor in question seriously proposes they should undertake. If the drinking public wishes to have its beverages free from poisonous ingredients, let it undertake for itself the duty of analysing and prosecuting. The total abstainers are not injured by the poisoning of the poison. It never passes their lips. Let the drinkers look after the business themselves, and not try to shift the trouble and expense on to the shoulders of the Good Templars and other abstainers, already far too heavily taxed and burdened, for the benefit of the tippler. But mark the charming inconsistency of the publican's advocate. When we are discussing the question of the respectability of the publichouse business, we are indignantly told that there are no such respectable,, nay noble, men as the publicans. There may, it is admitted, be " a black sheep or two here and there,", but the order, as a whole, are men whose high moral tone sheds lustre on their trade, and elevates it to a position of dignity almost amountingto moral grandeur. So asserted the Superintendent of Wellington during last session of Parliament, and so do the editorial advocates of the publican declare in almost every issue of their journals. Yet with the same breath they tell us that the adulteration of alcoholic liquors is a frightful and wide spread cause of injury in the Colony, the parent of nearly all its drunkenness, and so forth. Now who is it that puts the poison into the harmless rum, gin, or beer ? Is it those gentlemen whose high moral tone is so constantly applauded ? Is it the respectable publican, who cannot bear a drunkard about his house 'I The evil is said to be of frightful magnitude—wide spread all over the Colony—and yet the publicans are all so respected that hardly ever is a license taken away, or even a word of censure spoken against any of them by the police or the magistrates, on licensing day or any other time. But further, our kind friend Mr. Editor advises his friends of the Temperance cause to turn themselves into a detective police, and root out this evil of adulteration. We should like to know what the great army of provincial and colonial police are kept for ? Isn't it their special business to look into such matters ? Ts the duty to be relegated to volunteer " fanatics and enthusiasts," while the policeman warms his nose at the bar parlor fire or flirts with the pretty maid who drags about the perambulator? If this evil of adulteration is so great and so pressing, let us know in how many cases at the late Licensing Court, or on any other occasion, the police have laid informations against the publicans for selling the poisoned liquor ? We have not noticed a single case in all New Zealand. Well, if the Government authorities whose special duty it is, havo failed for long years past to detect a single instance of such adulteration in the 3000 to 4000 drink shops of New Zealand, how is the volunteer "fanatic," with no legal power or opportunity for detection, to do what the policeman cannot ? This outcry about adulteration being the cause of intemperance is a most palpable "red herring," draggod across the scent to distract attention, and divert the pursuit of the real " varmint." When plain-spoken Lord Althorp was asked what was the cause of drunkenness, ho replied " strong drink ;" and a truer word was never spoken. Ho did not say cocculus indicus, blue stone, tobacco, salt, or alum. Though there are, wo dare say, flagrant instances of adulteration in our land, blessed though it be with high-minded rjublicnus, " we more than suggest, we assert positively," that it is the alcohol that makes the drunkard, and not the adulterations. The poison may aggravate the evil, and sometimes convert drunkenness into death ; but the class most liable to be supplied with poisoned drink would get quite drunk enough on the purest rum or brandy. In the particular case under uotico at Auckland, the men went to town to engage deliberately in what- is described as "a big drank," and, for anything wo can see, the affair might have ended as it did if the drink they swallowed had been the purest alcohol ever distilled. For anything that appears to the contrary it was so. If it was poisoned, and thero is evidence of the fact, why was not tho poisoner prosecuted 1 The assumption that the drink was poisoned is purely editorial. Tho jury did not say so ; in its sagacity it called the case one of "accidental death," and there is nothing whatever to show that it was not the purest rum that did the deed. It was quite capable of doing it. Why seek for any other

cause than that which is sufficient to account for the effect ? In conclusion, we have no faith in the possibility of detecting adulteration either by police or volunteer action—at all events on such a scale as to repress the evil. That evil, we are told, is of "vast magnitude" in the Colony. It is highly penal now; and yet not a case is ever brought forward before the Courts ! It was only the other day that we read in the report of the Wairarapa Licensing Court, the statement by a policeman, that the quality of the liquors in two houses for which renewals of licenses were being asked, was "horrible," and "shocking bad." Yet, with this knowledge, the sagacious Dogberry had never instituted any prosecution; and the Justice Shallows, who heard the statement, ordered none to be instituted. But more. The Imperial Licensing Act, passed more than a year ago, contains very stringent anti-adulteration clauses and penalties. The Hon. Mr. Bruce declared in Parliament, that one-half of the British public-houses live by adulteration, and that if it were stopped, they would close their doors. And yet, with the highly-organised police of the old country, not one prosecution for adulteration has taken place in all Great Britain during the whole year since the Act was passed ! And we are to expect that our Colonial "Bobbies," with the aid of a few volunteer fanatics, are going to root out this "frightful evil," which is said to be the parent of nearly all the intemperance in the country !