The Globe. SATURDAY, JUNE 9, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 923, 9 June 1877, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY, JUNE 9, 1877.

L* dealing with amendments in the licensing laws, the question which, the public have to decide is, the extent of the restriction which should be imposed upon the liquor traffic. It would be mere waste of time to argue with those who advocate absolute freedom from legislative control. The mere fact that we have licensing laws in nearlyall civilised countries, is a proof that control of some kind is considered necessary. Such interference on the part of the Legislature implies a belief that, if left unchecked, the traffic would be dangerous to the community at large. The question which we have to decide, therefore, is, do the restrictions at present in force give the results we have a right to expect. Is it possible, under a different set of laws, to reduce the evil consequences of drunkenness and lessen the crime which results from it ? The advocates of the Local Option Bill say yes; and the arguments they produce are certainly of a very telling nature. What does this Bill propose to do ? Nothing very revolutionary, after all. It proposes to place in the hands of two-thirds of the ratepayers the power of saying that no license shall exist in their district. Now, under the Licensing Act at present in force in the colony, two-thirds of the people of any licensing district can say that a particular publican shall not have a license, and the Bench is compelled to refuse it. The principle of the Bill is, therefore, admitted already. As Mr. Stout pointed out, what the Option Bill proposes to do is, to get rid of an injustice, by which one publican might be picked out, and refused a license, simply on account of personal unpopularity. Instead of this objectionable mode of dealing with the question, once every three years, the people of each district would* be called on to say, at the ballot-box, whether a license shall be granted in the district or not. It is urged, and we fully admit the force of the argument, that no law is workable unless it has public opinion to back it up. A stringent Licensing Act would be practically unworkable if the great mass of the people were opposed to it. In our opinion the Local Option Bill fully recognises this fact, for, unless two-thirds of the people of any particular district are in favour of putting it into operation, it cannot be enforced. It evidently therefore takes for granted the existence, in its favour, of popular opinion, otherwise it can never be enforced; and were it ever to be generally adopted it would be because public opinion demanded it. There are two classes who are supposed to be strongly opposed to such a measure, the minority in each district, and the publicans. It is quite true that there would be an infringement of the liberty of the minority whenever the Act was brought into operation. But if two-thirds of the ratepayers of a district solemly declare that it is to their interests that no licenses shall be granted, the liberty of the minority must give way to public convenience. There are those who think it a serious infringement of their liberty that they are compelled to pay for the education of their children, whether they like it or not. But no notice is taken of their selfish objections. Individual liberty must give way to the general good. This argument is equally applicable to the case in question. The second class of objectors is of course the publicans. In our opinion, if they consulted their own interests, they would petition in favour of the Local Option Bill. Under it they would be far more justly dealt with than under the present law. As it now stands, any individual among them is liable to be petitioned against and have his license removed. An astute publican in a district, might succeed in getting rid of a dangerous rival by enlisting the aid of the G-ood Templars in getting up a petition against him. The present law opens the door for the exercise of paltry rivalry, which could not exist were the Local Option Bill in force. We arc. therefore, of opinion that the proposed measure is well worthy of a trial, and should be heartily welcomed by (the community at large, and by the publicans themselves.