Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14380, 25 November 1908, Page 6

THFj BRITISH LICENSING. BILL. Ar,THOUCH the passage of the British Licensing Bill, despite all the contention of which it lias been the subject, was practically a.foregone conclusion' it has been something of : a triumph for Mr Asquith that it should have been approved by the House of Commons'by a majority of 23? votes ojijt; f.hir*i/^J

s»g. Ori its second reading the Bill went through with an ■ cvep larger B]ftjority, but since then it has been subjected to protracted and searching revision in committee. In winding up the- debate on the .second reading Mr Asquith said that the real question before the House was, "Did they approve of, a time limit?" There has evidently been little danger to the Government in insisting; upon the propriety of such a provision though it has seen fit during the committee stages of the measjiro-to offer to extend the limit. Despite tluv assurance of The Times that a big majority on this question in the House of Commons is an imposing facade with little behind ifc in the country, there is every likelihood that Mr Asquith'o Bill makes a somewhat wide appeal to the public as proTiding for the establishment of a system of popular control of the liquor traffic. In its original form it contemplated the application of a time limit, fixed at fourteen years, to tho,currency of the •principle uudei which, in terms of the Act of. 1904, compensation, is payable to those interested in premises deprived of their licenses, ivivile providing also for_ a sweeping ro'duetion within that period of the, number of licenses, which, would mean the suppression of iw many as 32,000 public-houses within the time limit mentioned. The precise extent to which the measure has undergone amendment prior to its passage is not to be gathered from (ho scant'information as yot available on the subject. The statement 'that notico had been given of no less than 700 amendments conveys, however, an idea of the controversial character of it? provisions. Although at an earlier stage- an amendment extending the time limit from fourteen to twenty-one years was rejected by the House by a large majority, general expectation that the Government would consent extension of the period has not been falsified, and Mr Asqiuth's announcement 6f the readiness of the Government to entertain the suggestion that for a short term of years after the expiry of the fourteen years' time limit the regranting of old license?; would not require immediate surrender of the monopoly value of the license, has been followed by an amendment from the Government extending tho time limit by, seven year.;. An important aspect of the Bill, especially to the United Kingdom Alliance, the Labour party, and generally those interested in the suppression of the liquor traffic, has consisted in tho fact, that it has proposed a widespread application of the principle of local option. That this would create consternation among those whose interest.? were directly connected with that' traffic and bitter opposition in ■Parliament was easily surmised, and it lias not been surprising that the Government found it necessary to modify considerably the measure of local option which is to come into operation at the expiry of the time limit. During the intervening period licensees are .given security of'tenure with the right of compensation if their licenses are taken away in pursuance of the compulsory reduction scheme provided by the Bill; but no-license advocates iii this country have possibly reflected that there are worse things than a threefifths majority after reading how, on the motion of the Prime Minister, the House of Commons adopted by a majority/of 1(50 votes an amendment necessitating a two-thirds majority for the carrying of no-license. The first of the local option clauses enabling any rural or urban area' within a licensing district to veto by a bare majority the granting of new licenses was, however, passed unaltered by a. large majority. As far as can be judged, there has been no startling modification in the compensation clauses of the Bill, which, all things considered, has had a rather less sensational progress than was predicted for it. The sensational part of its career, however, is probably yet in store for it. The Licensing Bill, considering the interests at which it tilts, is not likely to be cordially received by the House of Lords, even though representing all that Mr Asquith declares it does, and keen interest will attach to its fate and to the outcome of its probable rejection.