The “Compensation” Question.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 6265, 11 July 1890, Page 3

The “Compensation” Question.

The numerous cablegrams we have received from Home regarding the licensing law and compensation for loss of licenses have been founded on proceedings in the House of Commons which were initiated by Lord Randolph Churchill on April 29th, when he explained a Bill he had prepared to provide for “ local option.” The point of contention in the whole measure was whether publicans losing their licenses should receive compensation or not, and as our cablegrams have shown a protracted fight has taken place on this point. The following were Lord Bandolph Churchill’s remarks on this part of his Bill, and Sir Wilfrid Lawson’s reply : Lord B. Churchill said :—As to the question of compensation for vested interests, it was not in the power of any hon. Member to propose taxation, and therefore the Bill contained no proposal on the subject. He, however, wished to say that any reform of the licensing laws unacompanied by compensation for vested interests would be the greatest piece of confiscation and of robbery of which Parliament could be guilty. (Hear, hear.) The custom of renewing licenses had become so prevalent and so strong that the licenses issued under it constituted a properly. How eouldhon. gentlemen deny the existence of property which was the subject of sale every day of the year. The State had recognised it for the purpose of taxation, and, therefore, it was impossible for hon. gentlemen to deny that it existed. Deeply as he was interested in licensing law reform he would oppose any measure which by not providing compensation for vested interests would be an act of confiscation for which it would be difficult to find a precedent. Legislation on the licensing laws was demanded without delay. He quite recognised that a Bill of this kind could not be passed into law during the present session, and therefore be suggested that it should be read a second time, and sent upstairs to a Select Committee in order that its details might be thoroughly examined and tbrasbed out.

Sir W. Lawson congratulated the noble lord most heartily and sincerely upon his having turned his attention to this most important Question. The noble lord was indeed a most promising member of the Band of Hope. (Laughter.) Statesmen had done their best, and the publicans bad done their best to keep the people sober, and yet the licensing system had been the moat miserable and ghastly failure that the history of legislation had ever shown. He cautioned the noble lord to take warning about compensation, and pointed out that the part of the Local Government Bill containing that provision was wrecked. Did the noble lord think tho putting of provisions for compensation in his Bill would help to carry it ? Not a bit; compensation would be like a millstone round the neck of bis Bill, the same as it was round the neck of tho Government in their proposals. His (Sir W- Lawson’s) party had come to the conclusion that the principle of compensation in a licensing system which was only for a year was inadmi"siblo. The people of the country would not swallow it. (Cheers.)