Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 1871.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 17, Issue 974, 22 March 1871, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 1871.

Opponents of the Permissive Bill are

apt to advance as an argument against the measure, that, supposing it to have become law, and its probable result effected, in the stoppage of the trade in intoxicants, greai inconvenience to the public must result from the closing of all the hoi els. Thus Mr Colenso argued before the electors He said—"At Port Aburiri there were two hotels; the shipping trade of the port rendered them a necessity. Some person had told him that two-thirds of the population were Rechabites. No one could find fault with this, and he was glad to ]?nqw that the number- of Rechabites increasing. But under -(the permis

siye scheme how would this result $ Why next licensing day the good folks of the port would call upon the Government to shut up their houses." The great fallacy in this argument is that the stoppage of the liquor traffic involves, the closing of the hotels. It does no such thing. One or two hotels may be (perhaps are) a necessity for the Spit, but the vending of aleoholic liquors at these hotels is not. The intention of the British Government in licensing hotels is to provide victualling houses for public accommodation —■" a home for him who is away from home." Such are a necessity, and will always be so, not only at at ports, but wherever travellers are found; but as no one will affirm that intoxicating liquors are essentials of the domestic hearth, so neither can they be said to be so of the travellers' temporary home. The fact is, as we all know, the hotels have degenerated from their legitimate position of victualling houses, and become, as a rule, mere drink-shops—so much so that travellers often find, to their sorrow, that though drink is easily enough to be got, proper accommodation is difficult to find. The full* effect, then, of the permissive principle when carried out, will not be to shut up any necessary hotel, but to elevate its character from a drinking-house to a house of accommodation.

Mr Colenso strongly objects to a share of the power of veto being given to women—and especially to young women. We fear that in this at least he is far behind , the age. We would like to know how he felt thirty-four years ago when the very highest position in the British State was taken by a woman, and that a young woman. Events are demonstrating day by day that women are quite capable of taking their due share of social and political responsibility, and that they, as a rule, show that they are quite worthy of every privilege confided to them. Bub on this question, above all others, it is just that they should have a voice. They are the chief sufferers from the evils resulting from the traffic, when they are quite free from the vice of drunkenness; but it is too true that some of them, as well as the other sex, are victims and this consideration alone is enough to give them a right to a voice in the question of putting an end to the temptations of drink-selling in their immediate neighborhood. Mr Colenso, further, does not approve of drinking deadly liquors. He was, he tells us, one of a few who were connected in the formation of a Tern ■ perance society in .New Zealand in 1835, and he had never deseited his old temperance colors. We give the men who started that society all honor for the work they did, far short as it fell of what was needed for the staying of the curse of drunkenness; but the temperance principles of that society involved very little of self-denial, compared with that of the total abstainers. It was not much for the wine-drinker to pledge himself to abstain from distilled spirits—which lie did not use —so long as the wjne he did use was unforbidden; but he could not consistently ask any spirit drinker to abstain while he held fast to the wine-cup. If Mr Colenso has held fast to these prinoi pies, true temperance men have left far behind in abjuring alcohol in every shape—whether in ardent spirit, socalled, or in the more dangerous, because more insinuating, form of wine

and malt liquor. Yested interests is another point introduced by Mr Colenso. He appears to have a great regard for them. We remember the time when the seat of

New Zealand Government was removed fron> Auckland to Wellington, he op'posed tho measure on account of the vested interests of the capitalist;?, in the first-named city. The Assembly could not see them, and nothing like compensation was awarded. One of. the firstmaxims of civilised life is that when private interests clash with the public good they must yield. But in the present case no vested interest is threatened. Every existing licence comes to an end on a certain day in the year, and every liquor-dealer knows that he cannot calculate on its renewal if the licensing magistrate see cause to refuse it. One justifiable reason for refusing a renewal is the non-requirements of the neighborhood, and surely the residents of each neighborhood are better qualified to judge of this than possibly nonresident magistrates. A farther objection is drawn from the fact that the permissive principle allows a majority to dictate to their neighbors. Wo cannot see in what sense this can be regarded as an objection. Would it be better for the minority to dictate 1 It seems to us that the voice of the majority is the root of all law and government, and if the conservative principle be granted that existing or established circumstances shall not be changed except on the voice of a two-third majority as is conceded in the Permissive Bill, surely nothing more can be required. There was, doubtless, a very respectable minority against the return of Mr Colenso to the Council, but the votes of a majority of electors prevailed, and justly so. Unless such power was placed in the hands of large majorities, •society would be reduced to a state of utter stagnation, and there would result an end to all progress and all reform.