Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] SATURDAY, AUGUST 3, 1895. LICENSING.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 8615, 3 August 1895, Page 2

Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] SATURDAY, AUGUST 3, 1895. LICENSING.

Once more the vexed question of Prohibition v. moderate drinking is being discussed ia Parliament, there being two Bills on the subject at the present moment before tho House of Representatives. The first is that of Mr McNab, the hon. member for Matavira ; and the other that of the Premier. It may be contended at the outset that no private member should be allowed to bring in a measure that plainly aims at a serious disturbance of the fiscal arrangements of the colony. Tho country has incurred a public debt of about forty millions sterling, on which it has to pay a j yearly interest and sinking fund of j £1,G94,605. Of this large sum the j Customs duties provide no less than £1,560,000, or nearly the whole amount. Of this, the duties on alcoholic liquors amount to more than half, and it can readily be imagined to what shifts) a Colonial Treasurer would be put to make good this amount were Mr McNab's proposals to make penal the indulgence in alcoholic beverageß carried, Mr MeNab's Bill is an undisguised at* tempt to impose Prohibition on the peeple of New Zealand by a bare majority of those who can be induced to go to the poll, and not of the adult population, a large proportion of whom do not bather their heads to vote in order to negative tho infliction of euch a law on a British eommunitv, in which the liberty of the subject should rank second to no other consideration. The Premier's Bill requires that before such an interference with the personal liberty of the inhabitants of New Zealand can become law, a three-fiftks majority must firßt be obtained in favour thereof. This ia sound sense, as it would be absurd and grieviously j unjust to destroy the value of some £2,000,000 worth of hotel, brewing, sand other property, and inflict ruin on., all those concerned, merely because

a bare majority of those polled on the question had recorded their votes in favour of Prohibition. If such a majority were obtained it is certain the next triennial appeal to the people would result in an overwhelming majority ia favour of the resumption of licenses to sell alcoholic liquor, as the experience of three years of aa obnoxious law, which it would be impossible to enforce, would have convinced the bulk of the people that Prohibition was not a panacea for intemperance, but on the contrary an incentive to the evasion of the law, and the excuse for no end of illicit diitillation and sly-grog shanties. Mr MdSTab's Bill in drastic enough in all conscience as it enacts that all club charters shall cease after the expiry of a certain specified time, and that no bottle, New Zealand wine, packet, or conditional license shall be granted or renewed after the Ist day of January, 1897 ; and that after the expiry of any leases now in force for railway, refreshment rooms no further licenses shall be issued to such. The local option portion of the Bill provides that after the Ist of January, 1897, no license of any description shall be granted or renewed until the electors have determined whether any licenses shall be granted in. that particular licensing district. A poll for this purpose is to be taken on the second Wednesday in April, 3897, and thereafter on the second Wednesday in April in every third year, at which poll the electors will be asked to say whether they are in favour of " License " or "No License." A bare majority in this case would alao •uffice to carry Prohibition in any licensing diitrict. It will therefore be aeen that Mr McNab's Bill aims at enabling the Prohibitionists to carry their views by polling every vote they can, whilst the moderate drinkers and real temperance reformers do not take the trouble to record tteir opinions on the matter. The Premier's Bill is a much more common sense affair, and does not aim at placing in the bands of the most fanatic portion of the people the power to compel others to fall in with their views as regards the use of alcohol. Mr Seddon righily argueu that before so serious a change in the law takes place, there should be at least a three-fifths majority in favor of an alteration which would, if made, deprive the country of a very large portion of its public and local bodies revenue, and rnin a great number of persons now engaged, or connected with the liquor businean. The Prohibitionists know they cannot persuade enough electors to vote for Prohibition, and are very angry with the Premier for insisting on so common sense a provision in his Bill as that stipulating for a three-fifths majority, which we feel sure will prove of far more value to the cause of true temperance than Mr McNabs.