HAWKE'S BAY TIMES. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1871.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 18, Issue 1080, 28 July 1871, Page 2

HAWKE'S BAY TIMES. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1871.

The London Times is noted for reflecting the state of public opinion in Great Britain. It does not so much aim to lead, as to keep pace with it. Hence it is that when it utters its voice in favor of any question in a decided tone, that question n.ay be considered as vii tually an accomplished fact. Some pf us are old enough to remember the #mo when it first spoke boldly in favor pf the corn law repeal, and how astonfched the whole nation was to find it Seating the " Anti-Corn Law " Wirt Reference, acknowledging fchat it*

doctrines were proved, and that its claims must be admitted. This was done after a long course of opposition to it, and a persistent adyocacy of what was believed to be the main prop of the agricultural interest: —Protection. Events proved the Times in the right; the Anti Corn Law League conquered, and the Times continued to be the journal reflecting public opinion. Another crisis has now occurred, — anothet league is in existence; and after years of opposition to its claims, and persistent ad\ ocaey of the vested interests of the traffickers in intoxicants, it has again spoken--again it utters no uncertain sound, but, as before, acknowledges the United Kino'dom Alliance to be a great fact, and that its demands must be met by the Legislature, On the morning after the debate and division on the question of the second reading of Sir W. Lawson's Permissive Bill, it produced an article which, though on the whole hostile to the movement, contained nevertheless the following important concession :— : ' J We admit frankly that the promoters of the Bill number amongst themselves the most prudent, industrious, and energetic of the laboring classes — those who strive most earnestly for their own self improvement, and are most anxious to promote the elevation of their neighbors." This, for a beginning, was not bad ; but the next day it dropped its hostile attitude, and, while acknowledging that the temper of a large and powerful party in the coun try was revealed by the debate, it called the attention of the brewers and liquor-dealers to the broad fact that 'he very thing they had been denouncing in Mr Bruce's bill was that which the Government was bound to do. Its remarks on this point are of such importance that we quote them in fall ; " Brewers and publicans cannot keep what they have got unless crime, pauperism, and popular demoralisation are to remain as they are. The money lavished in intoxicating drinks is abstracted from the slender resources of a struggling household. What ihe husband gains—if lie can be said to gain—the wife and children lose. Intoxication comes on one side, pauperism on the other, so that the evil is twofold. Some correspondents asked us the other day if we remembered the amount of taxation contributed to the revenue by the malt and spirit duties, and if we could explain how it was to be replaced after the anticipated operation of Mr Brace's Bill. The answer is obvious. When less is spent in drink there will be so much more for tea and sugar, for house rent, and for fifty other purposes on which expenditure is desirable. The revenue would never suffer from the enrichment and elevation of the people. Supposing the Permissive Bill had been carried and the drink trade, which is not very probable, actually stopped, what would be the result? Why, that .£100,000,000 a year would become available for the purchase of the harmless luxuries of life. The liquor dealers cannot too soon convince themselves that it is only a question of time and terms." Another sign of the times in the world of literature was afforded by the Pall Mall Gazette on the morning following the division. The argument of its article, which we cannot give in full, may be summed up as follows : The British Government, by its action in introducing its Licensing Reform Bill, has given a vast increase of importance to the principles of the United Kingdom Alliance. "Whatever strength an agitation derives from the practical adoption of its programme will certainly be enjoyed in future by the advocates of permissive liquor prohibition." Ic, however, does not advance more towards the principles of the Alliance than to advocate the "proper regulation'' of public-houses,

Of the rest of the London daily press the Daily Kewy is amongst those whose views of the question must be considered of importance. We give its own words :■— " Sir Wilfrid Lawson's annual motion was discussed this year under circumstances which gave it peculiar impoitance and interest. As a well-meant effort to solve one of the great difficulties of modern legislation, the Permissive Prohibitory Liquor Bill will always receive the respectful attention of the House of Commons and the public. As the scheme of a considerable body of persons, who support it with their enthusiastic advocacy, their money, and their votes, it more and more comes to be recognised as a proposal which must in some way or other be met , We cannot shut our eyes to the fact that it is a definite, logical, and resolute policy ; that its advocates are numerous, influential and earnest, and that they thoroughly believe in their scheme. These qualities make any movement dangerous to those whom it opposes, but they become ten times more so when everybody else is hesieating what to do. Any definite policy has recommendations to a nation waiting for a policy; and even the Permissive Bill may come to be accepted, if all other expedients should be discouraged and fail. The Licensed Victuallers and their friends have in their late agitation overlooked this fact. They have given some occasion to their worst enemies to rejoice over them ; in showing the enormous difficulty of reforming the licensing system they have given an argument to those who would reform it out of the land. l While we are waiting for a settlement of this question on the old basis, there can be no question that the demand for its settlement on a new principle is increasing; and if the delay is to be perpetuated, the permissive prohibitionists, with their logical but extreme and revolutionary proposal, may become masters of the situation.''' As was the case with the Anti-Corn Law League before referred to, it is evident enough that a movement which commands the attention and respect of the leading public journals, as does the United Kingdom Alliance at present, its triumph has become but a question of time, and no long time either.