Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 37, 19 June 1891, Page 1

Current Topics

AT HOME AND ABROAD.

The judgment of Mr. Justice Denniaton with respect to the licensing committee at Sydenbam and to which we referred briefly in oar last issue, whether it is borne oat on appeal or not, appears ▼cry consistent with jast law and common sense. His Honour's judgment was, ia effect, (1) that a renewal of licences could not ba refused merely on the grounds that a majority of the ratepayers were opposed to it, and (2) that the committee were bound to consider whether licensed bouses were required by the reasonable wants of residents desiring to purchase liquor. Indeed, to turn a licensing: committee into a committee enforcing prohibition seems something like a contradiction in terms, for what, in fact, is the use of a licensing committee if no licences are to be granted ? By an act of complete rejection the committee destroys its own raison d' etre, and should caasa to exist As the Jui^e pointel out, the Acts had b_ j es passed for police purposes, for the right and orderly regulation of the trade, and not for doing away with it altogether. He describ >d tin right claimed as a serious interference wit l ) liberty — " the right of what may be a bare nnjirity to impose upon a minority the consequences of certain viewe of the majori y." We have no desire to say a word in favour of the abus3 of the liquor trade. Oa the contrarj, from its very nature we believe it necessary to place it under very strict and careful control. But it is also needful that abuses should not creep iato the control, which, in turn, ia a matter far from iinposßib'e. It i 9, in fact, altnjsc asnecismry to limit the power of the controlling boiy as it is to restrict the liberty of the trade. Favouritism, prejudice, even wilful injustice, amounting to oppression, for example, any be emoloverl. In fact, it might not ba hard to quote an instance in wrr.ch N)n» sa % ,h motive seem? to ba at work without going vary far to look far it. W; k iow ourselves of two houses, of which one has been frequently complained of, and baars in its neighbourhood a reputation for anything rather than exceptionally good management. Of the other no complaint has ever baen made, and every one acquainted with it acknowledges that it has been always admirably conducted. Yet the licence of the first has been granted and that of the second refusevl. There seems, moreover, to be some defect in that reason sometimes assigned for closing a house, to the effect that it ia too near another of the kind. If such proximity leads to a harmful rivalry, if the proprietors vie with each other in offering inducements to people to drink, or any oth°r abuse is found to be the consequence, the reason indeed holds good. But in such cases as those in which well managed houses stand close together, why shoul i one be shut merely to give additional trade to the other 1 Nay, the effect of this may be harmful, for there is more danger of abuses occurring where business is too brisk to admit of minute wa'chfulness. Or, again, if a house be shut because that appeal ad miser •icordiam so often and so excusably put forward attaches to it, relative to the running to and fro of children with cans and jugs, is it more humane or Christian to force the poor things to travel three or four streets instead of one or two ? Tbe question, in short, may very well be entertained as to whether i ia not advisable to lin.it rather than increase the powers of committee^, and in every case in which a hou3e is well conducted to make a renewal of licence obligatory. As to prohibition, the matter is a serious one, and its discussion must be undertaken seriously an! at length. There is much, no doubt, to be said in favour of it, an>l thure is something to be urged agiinst it. Of its working in the Stite of Maint', for example, accounts vary, are so various, in fact, as to make it seem that nothing but personal knowledge and experience could solvs the doubt. In another of tha States, Rhode Island if we recollect aright, it was tried some two or three- years ago and abaudoned after a brief trial. What, however, must seem evident to every man of cool judgment and sound sense is that, to be successful, if it be capable of sncceFS, it must be the fruits of legislation and must embrace a whole country instead of resulting from the humours of a clique, and being confined to some limited locality. Partial prohibi-

A SENSIBLE JT7DGMBHT.

tion, as indeed we see, is an undertaking worthy only of fanatics and to be adopted by men whose motires are, in some cases at least, very doubtful. There can be little risk in predicting that it is certain to prove a failure, and that to ruin men who are honestly conducting the publicans' trade is an injustice as absurd as it is grievous. It if, besides, in some degree indirect robbery, because the question of compensation to publicans in the event of a general prohibition is still an open one, andjthe men whose houses are arbitrarily closed in particular districts are deprived of their chance of benefitting by its solution. Who, indeed, believes that either in Sydenham or in Roelyn or iv any other locality in which a prohibition committee pnisues its illocmsidered plans, there will be one drunkard the less at the end of the year ? No one, certainly, who has any experience of the drunkard or bis way?. If Judge Denniaton'e decision, therefore, pats an end to the foolish and bullying attempt alluded to even these ill-advised committees themselves may have reason to be thankful for escaping the ridicule due to failure.

BEJOICINO IN INIQUITY.

The London Tablet is quite deleghtei at Mr Parnell's defalcation with respect to Mrs O'Shea. The Catholicism on stilts which oar exalted contemporary so finely represents is evidently quite above the obligations of charity. On the contrary, it rejoices in iniquity. The " whispering* of a woman " that have done for Mr Farnell what the snows of Russia did for Napoleon are to it matter, it would seem, for warm congratulation. The lablet tells us that the whisperings of Mrs O'Shea have produced the same effect on the Plan of Campaign as did the snows of Russia on the invasion of Napoleon. Butisthtre really no difference in the sources whence the punishment in question proceeded ? As for the snows of Russia — " Before the face of His cold who shall abide?" Perhaps, in dealing with the mere Irish it was becoming that the devil, the father, for example, of adultery, should be called ia to aid. Nevertheless, for people less exalted and claiming ordinary privileges only, there appears to be some degree of blasphemy in the comparison. But dues our aristocratic contemporary really understand what he is doing when he makes his high and mighty attack upon the Plan of Campaign, and, in effect, asserts that tha de»il was called in, in the person of an adultress, to chastise all those who had any part in supporting it. We may give up to him bishops of Irish nationality, wherever they are to be found — or, at least, of his own accord he will make short work of them. In the eyea of the party the Tablet represents, Irish nationality seeme to be regarded as offering an effectual bar to the reception of the Apostolical succcession. But our excellent contemporary brings a very formidable accusation of flagrant disobedience to the Pope against bishops who are open to no such reproach. Let us take Australasia as an example. Mr John Dillon, on bis return from his late tour in these colonies, made altogether in the interests of the Plan of Campaign, and for no other purpose than to obtain assistance and support for the tenants engaged it, was able to deolare with truth that, with the exception of one Italian bishop, the whole hierarchy of the colonies had given him their active sympathy. Oar contemporary's accusation then, has a wider bearing than he appears to suspect. It is not only Mr Dillon and Mr O'Brien and the newspaper representing Mr M'Carthy he arraigns, but several prelates who have nothing; of the trmuleat Irish taint about them and whom even the lablet cannot believe to have off -red any impediment in their blood ti tha gracii of coasicration. There for particular example, is the Bishop of Auckland— no o. c calls in questi n hid Lordship's purely English origin and charactpr. Oi on ■ excision, indeed, the Auckland correspondent of the Otago Daily Timis approvingly hailed his L>r Idhip as aa Eaglishmm fi st <i-id t hi ua Oithjlic. That was a calumny, but it shows us the reput'in which thj Bishop's -pur sang and at'achment to his nationality is heH — imi yet Dr. Luck ga7e hia patronage to Mr Dillon's object. Must the blighting influence of Mrs O'Shei's whi&pars, tiurefore, be also invoked again^l Dr. Luck ? At Wellington, again Mr Dillon wa9 most coidially received. Does Archbishop Redwood come uuder the stigm tof rebellion ? The same is true with regard to Cbrischurch. Yet Dr. Grimes, within the last few months, has been treated by the Pope with especial affection — nay, has even been rewarded by His Holiness with a handsome gift. If the BQOWB of Bassia falling as a celestial chastisement on

the sacrilegious pride of the Emperor Napoleon hare had their infernal counterpart in the whispering of Mrs O'Shea— sent as a punishment on Irish offenders against the HAj See — whose transgressions, according to the London Tablet, Heaven could not condescend directly to visit — a full measure of justice needsia much wider ex'enSion of the penal eff-oiH. Tueße effects, indeed, ;umstjbe felt ia quarters in which the /ablet wouldi witness them with dismay. The Tablet, in fact, makes an accusation, and, to put it plainly, denounces damnation in a case, that, if hia arraignment and sentence are trm, constitutes a very grave and wide-spread scandal. All Englishspeaking Oaholicism, in short, with the exception of the anti-Irish section of Catholicism in England, whic*i the Tablet so appropriately and virulently represents is compromised in the matter. To be consistent, one contemporary must also rejoice to see the devil let loose against it. Aod, indeed, to use a homely bnt expressive phrase, we wonld not pat it past him.