The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1916. REFORM BY INADVERTENCE

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2868, 5 September 1916, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1916. REFORM BY INADVERTENCE

One thing which seems to be already quite clearly established in regard to the- "anti-shouting" innovation is that it has much greater importance than either its advocates or opponents would have thought possible before it had been carried into,effcct. From the point of view of the publican, the regulation which forbids a man to buy a drink for his friend has proved in practice something approaching a calamity—a calamity measured by a. sharp drop in receipts, which seems likely to be a standing feature of hotel trading so long as the regulation against "shouting" is enforced. To tho members of the general public, who have no immediate concern in the troubles of vendors of alcoholic liquors, a larger question is opened. It will hardly be denied by any save ex-,-ironists that in legislating against "shouting" Parliament has sTumbled | upon a tangible reform. Like the ugly duckling in the fairy talo ; "anti-shouting" has undergone a metamorphosis, and astonished the acquaintances of its early youth. It is a reasonable rendering of the facts to say that this measure, which is now in practice surprising some I at least of those who supported it at the proposal stage, was taken up by politicians as an alternative to making a really definite concession to the strong public demand for some drastic limitation upon the sale of liquor during the period of tho war. Probably many of thoso who supported the proposal believed that its effects would bo insignificant as compared with the reduction of hours, which has been enforced in Great Britain and in Australia; and the more pronounced No-License advocates made no secret of their opinion that they had beon given a stone instead of bread. Experience of "anti-shouting" makes it necessary to heavily modify these opinions. It is too soon to attempt to finally appraise the reform, but that a reform has been effected no reasonable man- wil deny. Looking at the matter from the merely statistical aspect, tho re? ported reduction in bar trade is striking: In the case of Wellington hotels it is said to average at least 20 per cent., and in some cases a much higher figure is touched. Similar results are reported in other parts of the Dominion. If any comparison is instituted between the effects of "anti-shouting" and those of tho_ early closing enforced olscwhoic it is a point to be remembered that the true- position will not be disclo'sod by merely comparing the proportions in which bar trado has been reduced. It has been contended, no doubt justly, that the limitation of hours gives a direct stimulus to the home consumption of liquor. Tho prohibition of "shouting" will obviously be less apt to lead to that result, and it seems in this respect bettor calculated than early closing to conduce to moderation and economy where the consumption of liquor is concerned. As tho operation o* tho regulation is described, it has effectively abolished for the time a practice which had littlo to commend it, and was in inoro than one respect open to condemnation. "Shouting" in general was not an excrciso of hospitality, since the return "shout" was the rule, and it was attended

in most cases either by wasteful expenditure or by excessive "drinking. The pronounced effect of. the new regulation supplies pretty clear proof that those members of tho public who occasionally resort to hotel bars are breaking away from a habit to which they had adhered possibly rather by custom than from inclination.

The somewhat unexpected results achieved should give food for thought to those engaged in the liquor _ trade, _ not only as regards the existing situation, nut in regard to. the future. "Anti-shouting" is a war measure, but" this does not necessarily mean that the last will have been heard of it at the end of the war. The plaint of tho publican apart, the conditions created by tho regulation seem not unlikely tp become popular, and it is possible that at the end of the war a strong demand may be raised for tho perpetuation of a reform which at present has only the'standing of a temporary war measure. It is not easy to estimate such a possi-/ bility in advance, but it cannot be regarded as without significance that a very drastic innovation has been accepted by the public, to all appearance,_ very readily, and that, as information- goes, only feeble and half-hearted efforts have been made by a small minority of those concerned to circumvent the regulation. Ic is common talk that the "private arrangement beforehand," between a party of bar patrons, is a rare and exceptional occurrence. These facts are important enough to suggest that those engaged in ,tho licensed trade would be wise to make a very purposeful effort to adjust themselves to new conditions which may conceivably not terminate with the period of the war, though the whole position will, of course, have to bo reviewed at that date by the people and Parliament. As matters stand the position of the hotelkccpcr is unfortunate, even if it is assumed that "anti-shouting" u merely a temporary innovation. In most cases.he is in the position of carrying heavy financial responsibilities, which a big reduction in trading reccipts_ will niako it difficult, in some instances, perhaps, impossible, to meet. One proposed remedy under consideration is that of raising prices,, but it is not a very hopeful remedy. It would improve tho return on a given turnover, but it would also, in itself, tend to reduce the volume of trade. Drastic increases would have a very pronounced effect in this latter direction. A reform which otherwise* has a good deal to commend it is admittedly marred by tho fact that the incidental burden falls wholly on hotelkcepcrs, who are usually in the position of lessees. It is obviously a case in which equity demands a readjustment of the relations between the hotel licensee and tho owner of the property. Tho hotelkeepers seem to nave a very .clear claim to a measure of relief from tho brewers and other landlords, to whom they stand in the relation of tenants and agents. Tho claim deserves consideration whether "anti-shouting" iB to bo a temporary innovation or is destined to enjoy an indefinite leaso of life, and if no voluntary concession is made to publicans by tho powers behind tho hotel, very good grounds will be established for Parliament taking a hand in tho matter.