THE LICENSING BILL, THE PUBLICANS, AND THE PUBLIC.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 179, 13 July 1871, Page 3

THE LICENSING BILL, THE PUBLICANS, AND THE PUBLIC.

The Licensing Bill, introduced by Mr. Bruce, is one of the most extraordinary and one of the most important social measures ever presented to an astonished public. It is creating the keenest interest throughout the whole country, especially within the sphere of the working men at whom it is chiefly levelled. Petitions hostile to the Bill are being signed by thousands ; public meetings are being held in every direction ; and the minds of the vast majority of Englishmen are evidently quite made up on the subject. With a little wise organisation the ignominious defeat of the Bill is assured. It will, in its obnoxous clauses, share the fate of theluciferous propositions propounded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Meanwhile, it may be well to set down a thought or two on a subject so vast in its importance.

The Bill tends to confiscate property. It pays no regard to the property which is bound up in the existing licenses, and it puts an end to such licenses at the end of ten years, without making provisions for compensation to the owners for the loss which they will inevitably sustain. This is an interference with the rights of property, which- it is belived is now for the first time attemped to be introduced into a legislative enactment ; and, so far as it extends, amounts to absolute confiscation.

Hitherto the license of a victualler has always been treated as absolute property, and such license has been considered as perpetually renewable, unless forfeited for misconduct. This is proved by the fact that the Government itself upon every occasion when it has required to take a public-house

for the purpose, has invariably paid a price to the owner of the license, bii&ed upon the calculation that it was perpetually renewable — This calculation has always hithcrio been adopted by the Legislature in Railway Ada, or any other Acts for public improvements, and it lias" been reserved for the Licensing Act of 1871 to set at naught this universally recognised principleSome holders of licenses are freeholders of the premises to which the licenses are attached, and very many hold leases varying from twenty to fifty, or sixty, or eighty years in extent. It is certain that if this Bill should become law, most of the property so held would be depreciated in value from onethird to three-fourths in extent, and in this degree tho holder of the property deprived of to at upon which he relied as a provision for himself and his family. Can anyone call this, we will not say generosity (and generosity is as needful as statistical solemnity in a true statesman), but simple justice? Englishmen, as a rule, really love fair play — fair play is a jewel, according to a popular English adage. We would direct special attention to the gross injustice of this measure of unwarrantable und predatory confiscation, and that ground of injustice alone is sufficient to condemn the measure. It is utterly iniquitous.

The Bill is a clear specimen of class legislation. As both Hobbes and Locke wisely taught tho melancholy truth that most mortals are largely ruled by selfishness, that sell-love ia the dominant element in all save the noblest of souls — we may well dilate on this argument. Whig earis, Tory dukes, Kight Keverend Diguitaries cuu at all times and under all circumstances visit tho learned Athenaeum, the aristocratic Oarlton, the rather middle-class Reform, the well decorated (iamclc, or even the junior or but more genial brother. We need not inform our readers that drinks are obtainable with fullest latitude at those noble institutions. But a man with a guinea or thirty shillings a week cannot dream of such high matters. Practically, some place or public westing is a social necessity for a working man. And really a man who works hard seems to have a better right to occasional innocent relaxation with his friends than any other person. We ask how it comes that members o^ the aristocratic and middle class are to retain their club privileges while the working man is to be deprived of his glass of beer ? The rich man's club can be open all day and all night to any hour he chooses, seven days in the week, but the most respectable publican's is peremptorily to be closed at 9 on Sunday. This manifestly is class legislation — the most notorious instance we have detected for a very long time. All class legislation is alien, if not odious, to the popular mind ; and it rests with the people to upset the measure. That a (xovernment tided into power principally by workmen should on this (as on too many previous occasions) legislate with affronts or even cruelty for workmen is not pleasant. We have always denounced class legislation, and cannot make any exception in favour of the latest instance of it.

The Bill is a concession to narrow fanatics. Exeter Hall and Maynooth men have for once shaken hands, and shaven priests and prim goody Puritans form an unprecedented and curious combination. They want to set the Thames on fire, but they are hardly likely to succeed this time. Now, these persons are perfectly welcome to their own convictions. They enjoy the fullest freedom. They have also a right to persuade, to proselytise. But they have no right to urge compulsion. Where they argue against drunkenness we cordially agree with them. That, no doubt, is a serious evil. But it does not follow that clue moderation (" wise discretion," as Lord Brougham used to say) is a serious evil. The wise medium is the true thing for human life, as teachers like St. Paul and poets like Horace always taught. There are always two ways of looking at a subject. Thus ; let us make a crusade against G-luttony, and disestablish the butchers. Then, dress, when extravagant, is an evil, and has led many people, especially young women, to" deeds not commendable. Revive, then,

the old sumptuary laws. Betting, no doubt, has become an awful evil, and while hitting the poor man, let us also, in justice, remember Tattersdli's. Smoking some worthies object to, and an " anti-tobacco society " already e.xists. There are, in truth, people who object to everything, and are so disagreeable that they want to drive everybody else to their views. There is no telling where the principle, if logically carried out, would stop. Eating, drinkiug, clothing — all are well and allowable if carried on in moderation ; and any laws, unless absolutely demanded, are to be regarded as tyrannical. The spirit of a Mawworm is not that which ought to inspire English statesmanship. The Bill would establish a system of social espionage; a thing highly immoral, and injurious to the social fabric. The function of the spy and the common informer will become highly lucrative ; but it is evident that any business of that kind is ruinous to the honourable feeling that ought to actuate every true man. By the operation of the Bill, Licensed Victuallers would be practically marked out for the most degrading surveillance. It is' tolerably clear that the Licensed Victualler would not suffer alone, though that would not be strictly fair. Any mean, or dishonourable, or underhand system (such as the extreme surveillance that would be occasioned by the Bill) lowers the tone of the entire community. The Bill implies an outrage on the Liberty of the Subject. Mr. John Stuart Mill says (and rto thinker will dispute the statement) that with an advancing Civilisation there is a growing danger where personal liberty is concerned. There is a danger lest personal action should be curtailed, that the individual should be lost in the community, becoming like a mere drop in the multitudinous ocean. As this measure is the thin end of the wedge for the " Alliance " programme, it may be desirable to state tbat the whole theory of the " Alliance " people is thoroughly demolished by Mr. Mill m a passage too long for quotation here. Social restrictions might, for the most part, be left with safety, or even with positive advantage, to the public themselves. Individual action is to be held sacred save where the obvious interests of others are interfered with". The history of Progress in this respect is somewhat peculiar ; yet much remains to be dons. The age of despotic restrictions ought to be over. Let us take a few examples. We all have a free church or chapel, or even staying at home, or strolling in the fields ; as matter of fact, the selection is open to each man. This is called Eeligioua Liberty. Censorship of the Press has been abolished : we can think and also read as we like. If we can read and even perform, the highest of all acts — that of worship — without hindrance, surely we may be trusted in this nineteenth century to judge as to amusements. It is odd that the contemptible dramntic censorship — alike unhisirorieal, illiberal, mediaeval and illogical — still continues to dictate to us. It is as though the people may be trusted to worship but uot to be amused — which is rather profane as well as silly. There are no sumptuary laws ; we can don swallow-tails or pea-jackets to the most alarming extent, according to sartorial beneficence. And why., by the same rule, cannot we be trusted to eat and to drink ? The social system always may be trusted to settle "those things in its own way. Neither is the measure likely to diminish drunkenness — though if it did, the main arguments lie untouched and unanswerable. Any reader who has witnessed the operation of the Forbes Mackenzie Act will be aware how powerless it is to produce prevarication. But we want here to notice a remarkable argument lately adduced by Professor Newman m a popular address at Leicester. We are careful how we speak on this point, for there does not exist a more intellectual, honest, thoughtful, noble soul in the whole country. That eminent man seems to hold ih&t ii' a majority holds a certain thing — say in a parish-— to be wrong, the minority ought to be sacrificed. We will adopt the tv qiioque line of argumentation. Professor Newman denies the Divinity of Christ and one or two other orthodox beliefs. The majority in Great Britain are against him. Have they, therefore, any right to silence him ? We are afraid yes — by his own showing. We might descant tediously on a subject which nearly concerns all Englishmen. We must legislate, not for a class, but for a nation. With a good courage and a united endeavour, in which all true-hearted Englishmen should cordially concur, the grand principles of popular and even personal freedom will, no doubt, be triumphantly vindicated. The Bill, if not withdrawn, may be infinitely modified; meanwhile, what we say is, " Reform it altogether" — Home paper.

It is notified in the Provincial Government " Gazette," of June 28, that Crown Grants in favour of the undermentioned persons, resident at Tapanui, are now ready for delivery ,• — James Brown. Robert Currie. D. C. Dalton, John Edgar, Thomas Edwards. Samuel Pat-sons, Henry Philips, James Bobbie. James Rodger, J. A. Steel, William Strean, Adam Swan, Magnus Tait, and John Taylor. Gold is reported to have been found in the Manawatu Gorge, Wellington. An anti-shouting club has been formed at Collingwood, Nelson.