THE LICENSING LAW.

Colonist, Volume XXV, Issue 2994, 27 October 1881, Page 3

THE LICENSING LAW.

A conteibutob ts tbe' Otago Witness' writes as follows:—

When it shall be made to appear in open Court that any person, by excessive drinking of liquor, misspends, wastes, or lessens his or her estate, or greatly iujurea his or her health, or endangers or interrupts the peace and happiness of his or her family, the Justices presiding in such Court shall, by writing under the hands of any two Justices, forbid any licensed person to sell to him or to her any liquor for the space of one y6ar, and such Justices, or any other two Justices, may, at the same or any other time, in like manner forbid the selling of any such liquor to the said drunkard by any such licensed person of any other city, town, or district to which the drunkard shall or may be likely to visit for the §arae." So eaye clause 167 of our new Licensing Act and thereafter enacts penalties not exceeding £5 on each offence of supplying, or procuring Buppliea, for any such person. Accordingly notices are seat round, and I have a copy of one before me informing licensed persons that certain Justices " forbid any licensed. perdon ito sell to John Snooks any liquor for the-■pace ;of. one; year." But a difficulty arises. John Snooks is not known, or there may be more than one John Snooks. Now what is the un» fortunate publican to do? Is he, when any stranger approaches his bar, ipersonally, or by; the mouth of the fair Hebe who dispenses the liquor, to iuquire," Are you John Snooks, the drunkard?" Or supposing the landlord to have received a dozen or a hundred such notices, is a catechism to be carried on thus: •• Are you John Brown, then ? or Dick Jones? or James Robinson!" or, to shorten, the matter, " Who are you ?" These confirmed . drunkards are very cunning too, and probably would not answer to their proper names. What is to be done, then? Of course I'm not supposing them to be actually drunk at the moment, but only taking iusup^ plies to put them "a little forrader." It is evident thaa the fram era of the Act ommited one provision which ought to have provided that any such confirmed drunkard should be photographed,,and his counterpart presentment sent round with the notices Thia would have encouraged local industry in the way of photographic art, and'rendered it at least possible for pubjicant.to keep the law. As it is,1 it thin clause is generally put in force, there must be. a few hundreds in every city'who "gnatly injure their health," or "endanger the peace oi their family," or " leisen their estate" ,by drinking tto much, and if all theis --■" i° lj-'-- : :'• > s<J '

individuals are to be taken under-the protection of two J.P.s and made the subject of notices aud prohibitions of the above character, and; the publicans } objected to prosecutions for. not ful-_' ( filling the conditions thus imposed upon them, we shall have lively times I hare no doubt of the benevolent intentions of the framers of this remarkable clause, but I have a considerable doubt of their wisdom. Like many other very fine things, is is no doubt very desirable to stop drunkards from getting drink, but extremely difficult to carry out. Would it not be simpler to enact that for every drunkards who comes to grief we should hang a publican —the first that catne to hand ?