THE PERMISSIVE BILL.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 206, 22 August 1876, Page 4

THE PERMISSIVE BILL.

The London correspondent of the Auckland. Star writes as followß under date June 29 : — Sir Wilfrid Lawson and his friends have had it out again about the Permissive Bill, and although they have, as we ait expected, been uosucceeaf'ui, etill they have very good cause for jubilation, for (be progress their cause

has made, both inside and outside the House has been most marked. This is the first occasion on which the question has been fairly met in the Houbo of Commons on its merits. During previous sessions there has been a disposition to throw every kind of ridicule and banter upon tbe Bill, and to treat the whole question as a howliog joke. There is nothing of that eort now. Tbe feeling has become universal that the proper regulation of the liquor traffic is the one great question for statesmen of tbe day, and no one bas the hardihood to laugh at anything connected with the National . shame. The only question, at issue therefore is ■—What form shall' this most necessary legislation take ? Now, it is notable that although so many members condemn the Permissive Bill, they do not offer any substitute for it. Mr Jacob Bright promised some measure which should take its place, but it is not yet forthcoming. Sir Wilfrid and bis party have expressed themseltrei as aoxious to meet any proposition for sound legislation on i the subject. They are not indissolubly wedded to their Bill, but they raise the question annually on principle, in order to keep it before the eyes of the nation. It seems to me that of late the argument has suffered a good many changes of complexion, and that the Permissive Bill is much less obnoxious to the notions of people generally than it was at its fir6t introduction. The Permissive principle has been so thoroughly accepted of J»te yeara io legislation 1 that it is impossible to call the Bill unconstitutional or un-English, and tbe only objection that can be raised to it is, that its effects would not be as good as its friends anticipate. Still, ac half a loaf is better than no bread, it would almost appear deeirabls to try what some such regulation would do. The Archbishop of Canterbury ia to ask tomorrow for a Select Committee, to go iuto the Liquor Traffic question. I have no doubt he will get it, and some tarrible facts will then be revealed— far more terrible than any one dare whisper now. Dr Kenealy made the best speech he ever made in his life, in reply to tbe champion of the publicans. Sir Wilfred Lawson spoke a long time, but was not ac jocular as usual. He made out an excellent case, aad the men of merry Carlisle may well be proud of their old member. He is a genial old man, and tremendously in earnest about his pet question. The members taking part iv the division were 77, fewer than last year, but it was race day at Aacof, and that no doubt accounted for the abeenoe of many. After tbe division I looked in at the Alliance meeting being held in Parliament-street. It wa B a funny gathering for a knot of defeated politicians. They appeared to be in wonderfully high spirits. The only cool man there was Sir Wilfrid, and the meeting cheered him until be told them that if they went on like that, people would think they were all tight. Mr Pope, who was present, stated what is worth knowing. He had been in the lobby during the afternoon, talking to stray members accustomed to vote against the Bill, and he said that (> at least half a dozen " of them had tacitly confessed to him, that they were nearly convinced that tbe Permissive Bill was necessary, but they could hardly vote for it this time, seeing that only last year . they voted the other way. Such straws show which way the wind is blowing.