The Wairarapa Daily. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1879.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 2, Issue 315, 14 November 1879, Page 2

The Wairarapa Daily. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1879.

■ —-,j> 'he Hen. G. M. Waterhouse, spank-in." 'u the Habitual Drunkards Bill, \l 'eported by Hansai'd as follows: -He vas quite willing to admit that this night be a well-intended Hill, l,„t of his he was certain, that it was an ixtramely ill-considered Bill, and they voulil bo acting very unwisely indeed verc they to give effect to it,' iteiV. "ice had been made to its beiu» bunded upon a Bill which was introhiced by Dr Camemn into the British Parliament Pic held in his hand « Jopy of Dr Cameron's Bill as it was intended in Committee l>y ihe Hone jf Commons. He was not aware wither it got into any stage beyond th. jommittal; but it woidd probabiy astonish honorable gentlemen to lie inibrmed that the whole scope and timlency of that Bill was to give effect to i provision which was at the present time on our Statute Book in the 2h\ alaiiae of '-The Lunatics Act, 18Cd," which, by the present. Bill, it Wi | s sought to repeal. If honorable gentlemen would turn to that clause they would tint! that it was in the power of any person, distrustful of his own power to control himself as regarded temperance, to make application to a Judge of the Supreme Court, who, aft<-r healing the case, might decide that com pliance might be given to his reqiet and that he should, f u - a period o twelve months, be bpt in detention m some asylum. That provision nofl in our Statute Book accomplished al which Dr Cameron's Bill, as amendei by the House of Commons, sought ti accomplish. In this respect, as in:sonn other respects, we had been far ii advance of English public opinion having had for some years on our Sfca tute Book a law which in England wa not yet passed, and which durin« th, hist session had only been favomljentertained. This Bill contained son,' of tta most extraordinary provision that were ever introduced into, a stu tute. He could not imiginea "rente interference with individual HberP than was here sought to be made The.ewas a new penal provision ii this Bill. Upon the application of ain relative of a drunkard, or any "uardiai of a drunkard, without that drunkaMl'i personal appearance in a Court of Jus tice, he might be sentenced to be incarcerated for a period of twelve months, this was a new penal provision, and ii would certainly be open to verv considerable abuse. Such a provision if was proposed to insert in Dr Cameron's Bill in Knglaml, but it was scouted bv the British Parliament as being aii interference with the liberty of the subject that ought not to be tolerated. If honorable members would look into the , ill closely they would be somewhat astonished to see that, upon the application of the parent, husband, wife, relative, or guardian of any per' son who was considered to be an'habitual drunkard, a Resident Magistrate might, on pi-oof of the summons, whether the person summoned appeared or not, sentence him to what was practically a terra of imprisonment of not less than one month or more than twelve months. i\ r ow in cases of positive crime they would not think of sentencing a criminal to a month's or twelve month.,' imprisonment; without his personal attendance at the heat-in* of the case, it would not be sufficient to prove that the summons hud been served. Actual personal attendance would be required. The opportunity ; of defending himself would be afforded j

to the person. Vet under this bill it would he possible tor a man to be imprisoned for a period. of twelve months without his personal attendance being required, and without his hiving that opportunity of defending himself which should !.e afforded to every freeboru subject. He thought he had shown tkt the compulsory clause in 'this Bill' was extremely objectionable; and, as regarded the voluntary provision, that was already on the Statute Book, - 'hm were one or two other point* to which he would call the attention of tliKAttonioy-Ueiieml.and on which it would be well that they should take aclion before proceeding further with "'« S>ll- Piwt of ~11, h e would ] ik( , to know whether the Bill had been ■vftwil to the County Councils for their report. Jt was proposed to make "ounty Councils responsible for the custody of habitual drunkards- they were to become, a charge upon the ! '""my fluids. He thought the opinions ot the (Vmnty Councils should at

miy rate be requested, and the matter brought to their knowledge, before any aution whatever was taken, There was ■•i provision that if a County I outicil did not act in accordance with (ho intention of this Bill the Government Jiouhl step in, and, at the expense of the Council, create homes for habitual flriuikiii-cls. He could not help foelin* that the fiffi-ct of Hie Bill would be to impose an altogether unlooked-for burden upon the con..ties, and that it was a totally different Bill from what any

one might suppose on merely reading it* title. It appeared to him that a person who was an habitual drunk: rd, ami who was distrustful of his own power to eontiol himself, had no right to cast himself as a burden upon the Stilte k twlvo months. The community should not be called upon to in and take care of such a man unless at the same time it became cnnileil to Ihc fruits of his labor. Ifl u ,

vv-a« to lie reclaimed at the expense of the Government of this country, or at ih« expen.se of a County Council, then certainly the Government or Unit County Council sh uld have the beuefii "I Ins labor, so that it might recoup itself to some extent for the expense east upon it. by reclaiming him. Kven weie it desirable to proceed with this Hill, it woul.iiiotbecompete.it for the Council to do so. because clause b' was clearly an appropivdon clause. He bi'lii'vci! there wax already on the Sta Uiti: IJiHik a law which provided suili,:l,,,ll|.v r " l ' control of habitual :inuik:l|,,L S and, although it might l.e ■1- :-ilr.|ll!l- 10.-i\M;e 1110 ll].-lubilH>ry KOU<rht. this bill, still the coiin- ■!•;■ v.-iis not in a position to utlbrd the ■xjk;ik-o ; and ft,,- these reasons he the „ill, alihough nominally isseuting to the second reading, " I