THE TIED HOUSES BILL

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XI, Issue 609, 18 September 1902, Page 16

THE TIED HOUSES BILL

As is generally known, Mr Arthur Meyers, chairman of the Auckland Brewers and Wine and Spirit Merchants’ Association, together with Messrs John Mowkray and Moss Davis, members thereof, proceeded to Wellington recently to give evidence before the Select Committee apuointed to take evidence as the result of the Hon. Mr Rigg’s Tied Houses Bill. We understand tbat the contentions of - those interested in the Trade in Auckland i]j favour of the present system are inter alia ad follows l :— That the owners of the present licensed houses were forced into that position some 16 years ago as the result of Prohibition Licensing Committees, after closing up seven or eight hotels, insisting upon large buildings being erected in place of the inferior class of buildings which were licensed, As no bankers or capitalists would find the necessary money to advance to these owners (most of the hotels were at this time free housesi), the members of the the necessary money to advance to these owners (most of the hotels were at this time free houses), the members of the Trade were the only ones that were willing to do so, which was following the modern tendency of -manufacturing and importing houses to make advances to the retail portion of their trade whereby the retailers divert the trade to the wholesalers. The public, however, have the matter in their own hands, and if they object to take the commodity sold by a certain retailer, it is very easy for them to close him up by refraining from entering,his hotel. As a matter of fact, in Auckland a hotelkeeper can obtain (with the exception of bulk beer) from his wine and spirit merchant any brand of wines and spirits that he chooses to pay for at the fair current market price, and can obtain any brand of bottled beer he desires —local or foreign. The two aspects of the question treated were from the standpoint of the public and of the publican. /From the public’s standpoint it was claimed that the following are the results in Auckland' under the so-called Tied House system : — (I) That the hotels ar*» superior buildings and up-to-date. - (2) That there is more, and a superior class of accommodation, including sanitary arrangements, in Auckland than in any other place where there are more free houses, the average number of rooms per hotel being no less than thirtyt-three. (3) That the bedrooms are better furnished in Auckland than elsewhere. (4) That every bedroom is connected with a substantial fire escape of the most up-to-date design, with ladders connectingsame and reaching to the ground. (5) That the tariff for boarder's in Auckland compares favourably with the prices charged; elsewhere. (6) That the quality of the beer (which is absolutely pure and brewed only from the best materials) and spirits supplied is> first-class, a nd equal to any supplied in Australasia. (7) That hotelkeepers stock all leading; brands of spirits, as well as all others asked for by the public. (8) That the price paid by the public is less in Auckland for bulk beer than elsewhere, viz.. 3d and 4d a pint, against 6d. (9) That the public of Auckland can purchase from hotelkeepers all well-known brands of wines and spirits of good quality at. lower prices than elsewhere. (101 That the conduct of the Trade in Auckland will bear very favourable comparison with that in any other city in New Zealand, there being no after-hour or Sunday trading. (II) That if !he public are not satisfied with the present condition of things, they, being the final judges, have the matter in their own hands when the local option poll is taken.

(12) That there are tied house in every branch of trade, it being well, known that butchers, soft goods people, printers, chemist's., jewellers, bakers and many others are on the same footing. (13) That under the tied house system the tourist traffic- of Auckland has been well catered for, there being no less a sum than £90,000 spent in the erection of commodious buildings in Rotorua, Whakarewarewa, Okoroire, Te Aroha, Waiwera and Kamo, although the beer trade done by these houses is very limited. (14) That the principle of commercial immorality embodied in Mi- Rigg’s Tied House Bill is of such a character as to cause a feeling of distrust to spring up in the mind of every person possessing property in the colony, or who has advanced money on slame, and must reflect adversely upon the credit of the colony. (15) That liabilities of an extensive nature have been incurred which would be absolutely confiscated under Mr Rigg’s bill. (16) That cash advances made by the brewers and wine and spirit merchants to hotel keepers are of a very extensive nature, and if they were called in, as provided by Mr Rigg's l bill, the effect would be disastrous to the hotel trade. From the publican’s standpoint it was claimed :— (1) That hotelkeepers can purchase ftorn their wino and spirit merchants spirits at a lower price than hotelkeepers elsewhere, as a comparison of the Auckland tariff with that of other cities will show. (2) That the price paid for bulk beer by the Auckland hotelkeepers is the fair market price, and is not altered, even though the materials' fluctuate in value. (3) That the Auckland hotelkeepers can, and do, stock any brand of bottled beer they desire. . (4) That the rentals paid l,y Auckland hotelkeepers are lower than those paid) elsewhere. (5) That the class of hotelkeepers in Auckland will compare more than favourably with the publicans throughout New Zealand. (6) That under the present system a number of undesirable persons have been prevented from becoming licensees, while on the other hand, many desirable people of limited means) have been able to obtain licenses, and thereby improve their position. (7) 'That there is rarely a case or bankruptcy amongst hotelkeepers in Auckland. (8) That legitimate hotelkeepers, whose desire is to really make hotelkeeping their trade, are not dissatisfied. (9) That the tied house system does not suit the transient hotelkeepes, whose object, is only to buy and sell out at a profit, irrespective of the interests of the people being catered for.