The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1901, THE LICENSING ACT AT HOME.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 281, 27 November 1901, Page 2

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1901, THE LICENSING ACT AT HOME.

Advanced prohibitionists often bewail the backward state of the liquor law of the colony, but theie is little doubt that the New Zealand laws, in this respect, are a long way ahead of those at Home, and indeed, judging by the remarks of many of thosa who have visited the colony, considerably in advance of those in force in most places, excepting where absolute prohibition prevails. Even in that matter Mr Woolley, the great American, when he was here, pointed out that the present law gave all the power that was necessary, and said, speaking as an advocate of prohibition, ttll that was required was to educate the people to use the power now in their hands. The late9t issue of the Alliance News to hand by the last English mail throws come light on the administration of the Licensing Act at Heme which will be re*d with interest, showing what in New Zealand would be considered an extraordinary state of Our contemporary says:—"There have been the usual attempts at a 'ideal' with the magistrates. In one or two notable casts it has been successful—at Blackburn, for example, where a big brewery firm secured a new license by yielding eight others. At Blackpool too, there appears to have been a very successful I piece of bargaining. The magistrates at Eccles, on the other hand, positively and baldly refused to ' bargain.' At Gateshead the justices refused all new applications, though in some case o , it appears, offers were made *o (surrender existing licenses, and in one instance to give the Corporation land for widening a road in a very congested district. At the sessions for the West Castle Ward of Northumberland, held atNewcastle-on-Tyne, a full license was granted to Benwell House, Mr Percy Riddell, the owner, uudertaking to give up seven acres of land attached to the building for the purpose of a public park, which he had offered to do, on condition that the license was granted. At Dover, moreover, in three cases new licenses were sought for old ones. One was refused and two granted, on condition of the surrender." This bargaining system is generally recognised as a way of securing a certain amount of reduction in the number of licensed houses without paying the owners compensation, and is vigourously opposed in many cases. In another page of the same issue, we find the following: " Mr Arthur Chamberlain, the chairman of the Birmingham Licensing Bench, made another notable speeoh last Thurs - Thursday, He commented again on the failure of the brewers' surrender scheme, and dwelt on the necessity of t reduction of the licensed houses in the city. He deprecated the give and take method of licensing, and seemed to think the brewers were able to find their own compensation in one way or another In some pregnant sentences, Mr Chamberlain made some suggestive points as to the duty of magistrates in tho matter, Now the magistrates would simply have, he took it, to cirry out the law as Parliament had made it for them—not the law as they would make it perhaps, or necessarily what they might consider the best law. The law said in regard to these licenses for the renewal of which the magistrates were responsible that they had to consider each individual case on its merits. The law did not say anything about compensation, and he would say to his friends, the brewers, again, ' Compensate yourselves.' They could insure every house they had, and by that means could protect themselves from any sudden and unexpected loss. It was exactly the same thing as would happen if Parliament provided compensation. If Parliament ever made up its mind Co touch this licensing question again he could not imagine for a moment that Parliament would tax the community to provido compensation for brewers, Surely they would raise the money by sonjithing like a licensing tax, which wouid be at the disposal of the licencing authority wherewith to buy up houses. Ih appeared to him to be equally simple without troubling Putliament that the brewers should tax themselves in insuring their houses, and compensate themselves if and when they lost their houses. Mr Chamberlain charactere d it an unjust law which h:td taken away the power of magistrates over the pre-1896 houses. But on the other hand, with regaid to tlio-.e house? over which they had control, he would say to all and sundry that it was not hip to themselves to consider whether the law ya? kjnd, reasonable, or considerate. It was business to carry it out; and if a magistrate not prepared to carry it out squarely and fairly, as he found it, he should r noi sit on the Benoh,"