LICENSING BILL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 974, 15 November 1910, Page 6

LICENSING BILL.

DISCUSSED IN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

"THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE." The Licensing Amendment Bill was received by the Legislative Council from the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon and was read a first time.

The Attorney-General intimated that there were a few amendments to be made in tho Bill, in Committee, chiefly draftsmen's amendments and none of them radical. .

In moving the second reading at the evening sitting the Attorney-General said that ior the first time in the history of liquor legislation in New Zealand the people were to be asked, if the Bill was passed, whether they desire or not that National Prohibition should be enforced. Tho issue of reduction had disappeared. (Hear, hear.) The locker system had been the seat -and source of great evils indeed. It was in this direction' he hoped to introduce an amendment which would prevent still further the evils ber ing continued after they had passed this law. (Hear, hear.) He also proposed to move an amendment to prevent people using the Courts to defeat on technical grounds the intent and provisions of the BUI.

A voice: You might lose the Bill. Dr. Findlay said he .hoped to do nothing that would lead anyone to reject the Bill. He hoped that the . Council would do nothing by introducing radi-j cal provisions into the Bill which would I be a justification for resisting the passing of the BUI. The Hon. George Jones (Otago) said that every day evidence was seen of the necessity for a radical change in our liquor laws. As regards the present Bill, the Prohibition party thought it a-step on the road to success, and the Liquor party, thought it a righteous arrangement of their traffic; Both sides were satisfied. He ■ had never had any sympathy with those' who cried out for a bare majority, but at the same time he thought the.three-fifths majority was top much to ask should be attained. Concessions had been made on both- sides, and in giving the four years after the carrying of National Prohibition the Liquor party had gained a great victory. He welcomed the Bill. because .it recognised the principle that the people had the right to rule, and because it recognised that alcohol was a curse.

The Hon. \V. C. P. Carncross (Taranaki) said he had never seen a Licensing Bill approached with such reasonableness as this Bill had been in "another place." He thought,the measure contained a great many steps. in the way of reform. As a ' moderate man, he looked. upon the Bill as a reformation of the liquor traffic, and welcomed it heartily. The Hon. 'J. B. Callan (Otago) said : there were two things ,in the Bill that appealed to him—one was the, abolition of barmaids, and the other was the retention of the three-fifths majority'.. He thought a, great number .of young men were induced to ■ go into" hotels to have a talk with a pretty barmaid, and this undoubtedly led them to drink. Without'' the three-fifths majority there .was too niuch chance of a change at the succeed-, ing- election. He did not object to drink. A leading medical man in Wellington had told him that the latest medical, evidence was that, alcohol was a food.

The- Hon. George Jones: It is .nothing like as good as bread. > and butter. (Laughter.) i ."'■'■ . Mr.'Callan said he .believed that education would gradually get the people to abstain from . drink without this . ab'surd proposal to abolish it from too country altogether. He would support the Bill. --■.;• •..•-.■

The Hon. C-M. Luke (Wellington) thought the Bill did credit to the Government in. trying to meet the growing demands of the people. Hβ was also glad that provision had been made for the removing of barmaids. He was also glad that liquor was not to be supplied to youths under 21 years of age. Be would like to have seen the Bill go further than it did, and prevent the licensee's sister or daughter going into the bar.. The Trade should take warning of the feeling of the people and set their house in order. Dr. Findlay.said that with regard.to., the "inexplicable".' spirit of compromise" which appeared to'pervade the parties, this could be explained on the ground that in New Zealand the question of whether we should have .drink. 0r.n0,, drink, or licence or no license, had been ventilated, discussed, and explained from thousands of platforms and newspaper columns until the time had arrived when the jury (the public), having heard all that was to be said on both sides, was now called upon to give its verdict. Ho believed both sides recognised that they must take the voice of the people and cheerfully submit to it. Dr. J?indlay proceeded to justify the period of four years allowed the' Trade in the event of national prohibition being carried. He oelieved- the permanent balance of advantages probably lay. with the Prohibition party. It was almost ■ essential that provision should be '-. made to.' allow tbe wife, sister, and daughter of the licensee to take their place ■in the bar. This provision was most necessary in country hotels. He did. not think there could bo any real objection to this limited exception. There were representatives of both views on the licensing question in the Council, concluded Dr. Findlay, and the general consensus of opinion was that the Bill was a fair,. Tcasouable, and honest attempt l to meet the, liquor question of '.'.■ The second reading was agreed-bo, and the committee stage of the Bill was 6et down for , to-day. . .. ■