CONFERENCE ON THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5084, 10 July 1877, Page 2

CONFERENCE ON THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

ihe adjourned conference in reference to the liquor laws of the colony was held iu the Provincial Hall last evening at half-past seven o’clock, the Ven. Archdeacon Stock being elected to the chair iu the absence of Bishop Hadtield through indisposition. The Chairman, in opening his address, expressed regret at the absence of the Bishop, and referred to the excellent and temperate speech delivered by Bishop Hadfield at the previous meeting of the conference. He should be very sorry, he continued, to say anything which would in the smallest way have the effect of undoing the influence which that speech was calculated to exercise, or of any of the speeches made on the occasion to which ha referred. He was undesirous of saying much,, for that reason, and also because he had had his say already. He felt very strongly thatsomething should be done in this matter, and he had consequently written certains letters to the Press, for the purpose of doing a little towards working up an agitation on the subject, in reference to which he felt very deeply indeed. He entertained this feeling both as a clergyman (because the nature of his duties gave him peculiar opportunities, not open to the laity, of witnessing the terrible effects from a social poiut of view which the habit of drinking had upon the community); and as a citizen, because drunkenness manifestly did 1 an injury to the State. He might mention that it would be his duty to bring before' the Benevolent Society, of which he was a member, resolutions referring to cases of poverty caused simply by drunkenness. Now, he felt that the Benevolent Society should not have to relieve such cases. But they were in this fix, they desired to afford the assistance asked for, and yet at the same time were conscious that by doing so they would be to a certain extent encouraging drunkenness... Therefore, he contended they had a right to expect that a limit should be put to the number of public-houses. He bad been very muchstruck by a conversation he had bad with Mr. Grace, of Wainuiomata, in reference to this point. That gentleman had steadfastly set his face against having a public-house in that district. He told the people that if they must have liquor, they could keep it in their own house ; but if he could prevent it they should have no public-house there, for the simple reason that it would surely lead to the introduction of an evil at present nonexistent there. He (Mr. Stock) thought the people of Wellington should be animated by a similar spirit and do all they could to limit the number of public-houses in town. He heard it said that there were no more publichouses in town now than there were twenty years ago, and he was very much astonished to hear that statement made. He was astonished, because if it was now an admitted fact that they were the cause of a wide-spreading evil,what must have been the condition of the people twenty years ago in Wellington, with the same number of public-houses and a very much smaller population. Turning now' to* another phase of the question. It had been stated that there was less of adulteration in the liquor sold than was generally supposed. Well,. all he knew was that a very strong suspicion was entertained that such a practice obtained. When he first came here he spoke to an officer of the 56th Kegiment, who assured him that there was less harm done by the amount of liquor consumed than by the bad quality of the liquor sold. He had spoken to the men when they came before him for such offences, asking them, for instance, how it was that they had managed to get drunk, and the reply too frequently was that they did not know—that they had taken less than would under ordinary circumstances make them drunk, but yet had been suddenly overcome. The natural inference to he drawn from this was that theliquor was adulterated—poisoned, in fact. He might mention another . instance, which did not occur in Wellington. A traveller informed him of the curious circumstance that having been served iu a public-house with some liquor, he found on consuming it that there rested iu the bottom of the glass some indissoluble sugar, of a blue color. Now, as to the remedy for this, the accomplishment of which was so much doubted. They could reach the publican at least, and his security should bethis : when he ordered a quantity of liquor he should bottle off a small portion, and preserve it in the cellar, so that should he he discovered to he serving had drink he could produce those bottles to show that it was the merchant and not he that was to blame, the liquor having been sold to him in the state in which he retailed it to his customers. If this were done and if for every conviction a publican were fined, there would be little likelihood of a man dealing with a merchant twice who had served him with had wines or spirits. He (Mr. Stock) would also impose a fine for serving drunken men with drink. If a man, known to he a drunkard, was served with liquor, he would fine the publican who served him or permitted him to be served in his house, for such a practice—-and it had became only too common—was, indeed, a great cruelty. A very excellent measure was introduced by Mr. Fitzgerald, of Canterbury, one of its provisions being that if a man was known to he a drunkard his photograph should be taken, and copies distributed round the various public-houses in town, in order to avoid his being able to indulge in the vice which had become a deep-rooted habit; and the result of that measure, he had Mr. Fitzgerald’s assurance, had been a very marked success. It was admitted generally that such things did exist, and yet they were told that there was no remedy for them; but surely it was an extraordinary thing that where an evil existed nothing should be done in the way of endeavoring to prevent it. If we could not make a man sober by law, we could at least pass a law to put temptation out of his way-. He very much wished that old institution, the stocks, was in force nowadays ; and when a man got drunk he would have him placed there for a few hours, so that everyone should know him for what he was. It might he said that this would be taking strong measures ; but surely something must be done. Were they to sit down quietly and see their fellow-men ruined ? It had been said that the conference had done nothing definite at its last meeting; but he was of a contrary opinion. Attention had been drawn to the subject, and he thought they had done something in having called together at a somewhat unreasonable hour a large number of gentlemen who had shown themselves to be deeply interested in the matter. Had that been made a public meeting there would have been no room to contain the numbers who would have attended, and he felt firmly convinced now that this movement would not he allowed to settle down until something definite had been decided on—this evil that they so much deplored would not be allowed to remain a blot on the town. He would point out to the conference that there was one direction in which citizens might act towards the abatement of the evil. It was this. Were he permitted to act as a juryman

he would never give hie sanction to _some of the verdicts recorded at coroners’ inquests, where it was indisputably shown that the cause of death was directly attributable to drink. He would not be found bringing in a ■verdict simply of <f ITouncl drowned, when he knew perfectly well that the unfortunate man had met his death because he was helplessly drunk ; and further, he would include in the record the name of the particular public-house he was known to enter and stop for a certain time prior to the fatal accident. It might be casting a stigma on the name of the departed; bufc was it not even well to do that, if by so doing they could hope to benefit the enmg ones who remained, and who by persisting in their evil courses, might meet with a similar fate? If this course were adopted, we should not hear of a verdict mod from natural causes ” in a case where death was produced by the unnatural conduct o- a brute of a husband who, at a time when his wife required the greatest kindness and attention, treated her with systematic cruelty and neglect. No means should be neglected to lessen this dreadful evil, and a good deal might be done towards its redaction if people would only have the honesty and courage to speak the truth. (Applause.) Mr. C. P. Powles, being called upon by the Chairman, then read the minutes of the last meeting, which were duly confirmed. Dr. Newman thought that a mistake was made iu supposing that the real remedy was to he obtained by appealing to the Legislature. They should go to the root of the matter, and endeavor to ascertain the cause that led people to drink, and then provide, if possible, a check. They heard a good deal about adulteration of liquor, for instance ; but he was of opinion that the spread of drunkenness could not be largely attributed to that. Medical papers went to show that this was so. Personally he was of opinion that drunkenness was caused through poverty in the houses of the poorer classes, and want of proper nourishment. What they wanted were institutions where the working men could go and spend their evenings rationally. If we could discover a means of ameliorating the condition of the lower classes; educate the women who were destined to become the wives of workingmen; make them really domestic, so that the many thousands of houses would be a source of comfort and enjoyment ; instead of, as was too frequently the case at present, a source of misery and general discomfort. Working men’s clubs might also be established, and the result would be the attainment of a higher social standard among the working classes. A member of the conference disagreed with the last speaker as to the causes of drunkenness, and added that no matter what liquor men drank, it was still poison, and if no means could be found to prevent the sale of the article, there would be little chance of the evil being reduced. Another gentleman (whose name our reporter did not know) expressed the opinion that the : chief reason of excessive intemperance was the ' fact that in the liquor traffic two trades were 1 united in one —the hotel and the public-house. No one could go into a house of accommodation without having the drink staring him in the face. The Local Option Bill, he contended, 1 would not be found effective for good. The traffic was patronised by the people, and sanctioned by the people. Mr. Shaw said, with reference to ths subject under discussion, that he had from time to time thought a great deal of the evils resulting from the trade iu liquor. He regarded it as sapping the foundation not only of health, but it was beginning to threatenonr liberty, because the publicans formed a very powerful political organisation. It appeared to him that there were two points of view from which it was necessary to look at this subject, the measure of social' science being the chief of these. They never would radically cure drunkenness by Act of Parliament. He Ermly believed in seeking for the satisfaction of a legitimate human desire, the desire for association, society, and of this want the interested party —or otherwise the publican—-took advantage. A partial remedy, he thought, for this was to be found in the establishment of working mens’ clubs, a movement in which he had greatly interested himself in Dunedin, and which had been signally successful. Social ' amelioration should be the great object sought after, and that should be taken in hand by the people themselves. By this means we should be cutting the ground from under this dreadful trade in drink. Mr. Shaw then referred to ■ the practice of adulterating liquor, and showed how certain publicans, by ingenious doctoring j of the drink they sold, managed to relieve unfortunate men of all their money, and then ] turned them front the door. He did not think , purely repressive measures would ever affect a permanent cure. He was struck with a Bug- ! gestion made by Mr. Travers, that it would be , wise to prevent (if possible) people giving so much credit, which would no doubt have an indirect influence for good. Mr. Shaw then referred the meeting to some extracts from a | measure relating to the liquor law in an ’ American State, and read out certain of its provisions. Ist. No man should sell liquor ' without a license, and no man should have a ' license without entering into a bond of 3000 dollars to repay all damage arising out of the 1 sale of liquor in his house. 2nd. No liquor should be sold to minors. 3rd. All places where intoxicating liquors were sold, contrary to law, should be held to be a public nuisance. 4th. If any man, with or without a license, should cause a a man to become intoxicated, he should pay a reasonable compensation to the person who took care of the inebriate, to be recovered by action at law, and an action may be taken against the owner of the house iu which the intoxication takes place. These provisions might be regarded as being rather severe, but he really thought they might be made to have a very beneficial influence as regarded the liquor traffic. There could be no doubt that the licensing law as it at present stood was very unsatisfactory. Mr. Woolcock, M.H.R., after some preliminary remarks, said they had all come to one conclusion as to the evils of drunkenness, and there was a general agreement as to the propriety of legislative action to ameliorate these evils; but a question arose as to whether there should be a licensing law, which of course gave certain monopolies to certain persons; or whether there should be free trade in liquor. It was pretty well agreed that the Legislature should interfere by imposing a lie snaing law. He bad arrived at the conclusion that drunkenness was influenced, and increased or decreased, according to the number of publichouses ; and if this were so, it was the duty of the Legislature to reduce the number of public-houses. Therefore he should suggest that the number of public-houses be fixed at a certain proportion to the population. If the screw were to be put on in this direction, it would he a favor to grant a license, and the onus of proving the necessity for a public-house should rest with the people themselves. (Hear, hear.) This would bo a much better course than putting the people in the position of having to object to a public-house. Mr. Costall advocated the preparation of a measure providing a better regulation of the liquor traffic, and repression and prohibition of unnecessary houses ; and he spoke warmly of the necessity of giving opponents of temperance measures in Parliament no opportunity of saying that the people were not anxious for legislation, and to that end he would prepare petitions numerous and strong. In further remarks he said gentlemen who had stated there was no adulteration practised in the_ colony, knew nothing about thematter. He wasinaposition to state positively that there were merchants in Wellington who were guilty of the grossest adulteration, and who had wines in their cellars as dead as dead could be, but which, as demand arose, were quickened and enlivened by a process which he dared not explain. Those who had been engaged in the work of transformation had themselves informed him that were people to see the bottoms of certain casks they would never again drink wine. Ho concluded by expressing a hope that Parliament should earnestly bo requested to pass the measure suggested, because ho was convinced that drunkenness, like larceny or any other offence, could be cured by legislation. The Rev. Mr. Patbkson suggested that speakers should address themselves to the motions before the conference. Let those be disposed of, and then others could be con-

f sidered. There was the motion, of Mr. Holds- , worth, and the amendment by Mr. Burns. > Mr. Burns expressed a wish to withdraw > his amendment, which was acceded to. i Mr. Ollivieu said the Local Option Bill was i a very attractive title, but he should like to know more about the principles of the measure. Was he correct in his impression that ; the main object of the Bill was to give people in particular localities the right to close the public-houses within the localities to which licenses had been granted under the existing law. (Hear, hear, and no, no.) That he had gathered from the Press, which had criticised the measure pretty fullyt was the main principle of the Bill, and if his impressions were erroneous, he should be glad to know it, for he conceived such a course would not be fair towards publicans. One's sense of natural justice would lead him to disapprove of such a mode of dealing with publicans, whose interests had grown up and been recognised by the existing law. So far as local control went he quite approved of it, or anything which would effect an improvement on the present state of things; but he would much prefer to see the resolution remodelled, so that persons might not be left m the dark as to the principles for winch they were voting when they supported the Local Option Bill. Mr. Wii. Hutchison, after remarking on the difficulties which hedged about the temperance question, said he felfc_ a great respect for all those who made a specialty of it ; and he could not- but think that the Hon. IvTr. deserved the hearty thanks of the community for the work he had done. But at the same time he conceived that nothing was easier than for gentlemen to take up with such question and evolve particular theories, which they might desire to see reduced to practice ; and nothing was more easy than for them to prescribe punishment for the publican and punishment for the drunkard. Yet their efforts might be of very little use. There was “ a great deal of human nature in man,” as Sam Slick had remarked ; and as they had had drink and drunkards from the beginning, they must expect that they would also have drink and drunkards for a good while yet. He did not altogether agree with those who held what were termed “ extreme ” views. For instance, it was customary to call publicans very hard names, and this he thought scarcely justifiable. No doubt there were some very bad publicans, just as there were very bad men in other callings ; but still he thought there were quite as respectable men keeping publichouses in this city of Wellington as there were carrying on stores or any other business. (Hear, hear, and no, no.) There were hotels and hotels, and hotelkeepers and hotelkeepers, and temperance advocates did little good in being unjust and uncharitable towards the class. Then, he thought the drunkards had been rather harshly spoken of. One speaker said he would put all drunkards upon the roads. For himself he Hutchison) protested against making any new crimes ; there were enough old ones already. Drunkenness was not a crime ; it was a vice—a degrading vice, and very often led to crime; but still it was not a crime, and if they were to treat it as such they must be consistent, and punish lying and slandering and sensuality of all kinds, in which case the roll of criminals would. soon begin to increase. As to the way drunkards were at present treated, he thought it would very often be well if wheu a policeman saw a drunkard reeling, instead of doing something to him to make him sufficiently noisy to justify an arrest, he were to quietly see him homo. After some further remarks on this point, he proposed to glance at the remedies suggested. He said he could not know how it was Mr. Oilivier did not understand the principle of the Local Option Bill. The principle was this, that the people of a locality should alone have the power of licensing houses within their locality. Perhaps it might be said to be an invasion of the principles of liberty, but it was no more so than the refusal to allow a man to create a nuisance in his backyard, to the injury of his neighbor’s health. But still he was not not much enamoured of the Local Option Bill as a measure, because he thought it would be inoperative. Like many others, he had his ideas of what the remedy should be, and he had jotted his ideas down. He thought there should be a restriction on the number of licensed houses, and that the number of houses should bear a certain proportion to the population, say one home to the 1000 inhabitants. (Hear, hear). However, his ideas might be stated thus : (1). That, with the uudemoted exceptions, public-house licenses shall be determined and fixed by the amount of population in the proportion of one pubic-house license to every 1000 inhabitants in towns and cities. (2). That the license fee shall be £IOO per annum, payable half-yearly. (3). Townships of 1000 inhabitants and under to have only one publichouse. Roadside public-houses to be at least nine miles distant one from another. License fee for these two classes of public-houses to be £SO per annum. (4). That existing licenses shall not be disturbed, but no new licenses shall be granted anywhere until the aforementioned proportion between public-houses and population is reached. (5). That the annual renewal of licenses shall not be necessary, but forfeiture may at any time be incurred by a breach of the law, such as selling adulterated liquors, or supplying men with drink when iu a state of intoxication. Now the population of Welllington was about 20,000, and for this population there were 44 public-houses; in other words, a public-house for every 500 persons, including men, women, and children. If they took the males only, then there was a public-house for every 250 ; and coming a little closer, and confining themselves lo males of 18 years and upwards, taking census proportions, the number of public-houses would be about one to every 120. Now did every 120 men in Wellington require a publichouse ? Certaintly not. But although this large proportion of public-houses existed, he could not say that he thought drunkenness in Wellington was on the increase. On the contrary he denied it. On the contrary there were a large number of as sober, as industrious, and as hard-working men as there was to be found in any part of her Majesty’s dominions. Nor could he agree that the proportion of public-houses was larger in Wellington than it was in any other city. It was well these facts should be stated, because he did not wish Wellington to bear the reputation some were inclined to stamp it with. However, this was no reason why they should do nothing, for he thought it was a matter for regret that so many houses did exist. There were 14 bakers and four or five butchers in the city to supply solid food, and 44 hotel-keepers to provide the liquid supply. If his idea, not an original one he admitted, were carried out, there would be no more licensing for a time, during which the proportion would gradually decrease, till it might be a question whether more houses were wanted. Then the principle of local control would come into effect —a control which he thought would result in a much more satisfactory manner than did the present system, for he thought it would be impossible to find a less efficient Licensing Bench than the present. They were very respectable gentlemen no doubt, but they had neither principle nor firmness. If they refused a license, three or four lawyers appeared before them, and immediately they repented of the evil of their ways, and forthwith granted the license previously refused. One word more. It must never be forgotten that self-control was a great deal better, and ought to be preferred to legal control, and they must look for and strive to help in a general elevation of the people as bein" of more potency for good than the rou"her agency of the law; and while seekin" after improvements in legislation, obey must nor forget to depend upon the education of the people for raising the tone of society and lifting men above mere sensual gratification. Mr. Holdsworth, m answer to Mr. Oilivier, said he had not seen a copy of the Local Option Bill, but ho believed the principle was as the Mayor had stated, and in reference to the allusion as to Us being unjust to the publicans, ho said if necessary the question must be dealt with as our forefathers had dealt with that blot which had defaced eur otherwise fair fame —pay for it, (Applause.) But ho was afraid _ it would be a long day before, in Wellington,

they would be called upon, even under the Local Option Bill, to pay for the closing of these fine buildings and profitable businesses which had seemed to excite the pity of Mr. Oilivier. But there was another side to the question. Were they to consider the places which operated as temptations for the indulgence in strong drink—the indulgence in that which not only damages the body but damn the soul. It had been said there were respectable publicans, but he asserted that it was a traffic of shame, and he could scarcely remember any publican who had not either in his own person or in that of his children come to a beggarly end ; but yet he denied that any could feel less unkind to the publican than himself (Mr. Holdsworth) ; but he detested the trade. After some further remarks, he proposed the motion standing in his name, —That this conference approves and recommends the principle of the Local Option Bill. The Chairman then put the motion, which was carried with only three dissentients. The Rev. Mr. Paterson then read the draft of a petition to be presented to Parliament as follows :

“ That the following be the draft petition for presentation to Parliament at the forthcoming session, and that the Chairman of the Conference be requested to sign the same on its behalf.

“ 1. That in the opinion of this meeting it is expedient that steps should be taken further to prevent intemperance in New Zealand. “2. That in order to given effect to the foregoing resolution, it is necessary, in the first place, that the laws relating to the licensing of public-houses be amended in the following particulars :— (a) That for the purposes of such laws, the colony should be divided into districts co-extensive with the judicial districts of the Supreme Court, (h) That for each district there should be a licensing commissioner, charged with the administration of such laws. (e) That the commissioner should have ample powers for talcing evidence and punishing offences in connection with such laws.

“3. That in order to give to the inhabitants in the neighborhood of any public-house, whether already existing or afterwards established, a substantial voice in respect to its establishment or maintenance, the following rules should be followed by the licensing commissioners :— (a) Not less than two months before application be made for a new license, the intending applicant should give to the commissioner written notice of Lis intention to apply ; and such notice should, at his expense, be published twice a week, for four successive weeks, in some newspaper circulating within the neighborhood, (h) Such notice should be accompanied by plans of the proposed house, and the plans should be open to inspection in some convenient place to be fixed by the commissioner. (c) If, within the two months, a notice signed by not less than twenty householders residing within a radius of 200 yards of the site of the proposed new house (if within a town), or by not less than ten householders, residing within a radius of one mile (if outside af a towu) objecting to the proposed license, be given to the commissioner, it should he his duty to take a ballot of all the residents within such radius, male and female, of the age of twenty-one years and upwards ; and if a majority of three-fifths of those actually voting should vote against it, then it should not be granted ; and no application for a new house, withiu the same area, should be entertained for one year after such ballot. fd) Even where no such opposition is made, the commissioner should satisfy himself of the necessity for such house, of the adequacy of the accommodation proposed to be given therein, and of the character of the applicant. ft) With respect to every licensed house, whether already existing or afterwards established, a similar ballot should be taken as to its continuance, upon the written application of fifty householders within the town radius, or of twenty within the country radius ; and upon a similar adverse vote, the license should not be renewed ; but no such ballot should be repeated until the lapse of three years, ffj Every licensee should enter into a recognisance with two sureties to the satisfaction of the commissioner, in a sum to be fixed by him in each case, but not for less than. £l5O, conditioned for the due observance of his license.

“ 4. That conviction of any of the following offences should entail absolute forfeiture of the license, and that no license for the same house should be granted for at least one year, fa) For suffering drunkenness, or other disorderly conduct in the house, (h) For using or permitting to be used therein any means or expedients for adulterating liquors. (c) For knowingly permitting to be sold or consumed therein any liquors prohibited to be sold, manufactured, or imported by the laws relating to adulteration.

“5. That for the purpose of aiding the commissioners in the performance of their duties they should have power to command the services of all police officers. “ 6. That, in the next place, it is necessary that stringent provisions should be made by law for preventing the sale, manufacture, or importation of adulterated and unwholesome liquors. “7. That the duty of administering the laws against adulteration should also he entrusted to the licensing commissioners, iu which they should be aided by the Customs authorities.

“ 8. That all expenses connected with the administration of the laws relating to licenses and adulteration, should be primarily chargeable on the revenues arising therefrom, including license fees, fines, and forfeitures. “ 9. That a petition, embodying the above resolutions, he presented to the General Assembly, and that Mr. — ; — be requested to take charge of the same.” The Rev. Mr. West supported the petition. His Worship the Mayor dissented from that portion of the petition recommending the appointment of highly-paid licensing commissioners.

The Rev. Mr. Harvey moved, as an amendment, that a committee should be appointed to draw up a petition to Parliament in accordance with the resolution previously passed, on the motion of Mr. Holdsworth, recommending the general principles of the Local Option Bill. Mr. Smith seconded.

After discussion the amendment was put, and declared carried by 21 to 18. Mr. Hooper moved the adjournment of the conference for one week. This was seconded by Mr. Twomey. ■ The Rev. Mr. Paterson opposed an adjournment, as he considered the whole thing had ended in smoke.

The motion having been put, the adjourn, meat was carried nem. con.