PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5111, 10 August 1877, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. .Thursday, August 9. The House met at the usual hour, and the Speaker took the chair. •PETITIONS AND NOTICES. Sir GEORGE GREY presented a petition from Thames residents, re an alteration of the licensing laws of the colony with a view of preventing intemperance. He presented two additional petitions from the same district. Several other petitions were presented. Notices of motion were given by Messrs. Murray, Montgomery, Shrimpski, Richard-son,-Maoandrew, and others, QUESTIONS. In answer to Mr. Cox, the Hon. Mr. ORMOND said tenders would be called as soon as possible for the completion of the railway from Ngaruawhia to Hamilton, and thence to Ohaupo. In reply to Mr. Taiap.OA, the Hon, Major Atkinson said it was not intended to introduce a new measure relative to native schools. In reply to Mr.. Baspf, the Hon. Major Atkinson said the Government had taken steps for ..the establishment of two Schools of Mines, one in Canterbury and the other in Otago. Mr. STOUT asked the Government, —(1.) Whether the Chief Surveyor of the Otago Provincial District has furnished any report, to the Government of the cost of engineering and road superintendence in Otago under the provincial system? (2.) Whether the Government will prepare a table showing the increased cost ot maintenance and management of the main arterial roads under the county management, to what they were under the provincial system? (3.) Whether the Government will prepare, and lay before this House, a return showing the amounts paid by county councils as salaries to chairmen, clerics, engineers, and treasurers of counties; also, the amount of .honorarium and travelling expenses paid to county council members? ' ! The Hon. Major ATKINSON; replied that the report of the engineer, which tfas in p'repa’ratioij, would be laid before 1 the House'’as soon as it was received by the Government. With regard to the returns asked for, he said they would be furnished. , BILLS INTRODUCED. The following Bills were introduced and read a first time :—A Bill to provide for the leasing or exchange of the site set apgirt for a Grammar School in the city of Auckland ; a Bill to amend the Wellington Reserves Act, 1876 ; a Bill to amend the Medical Practitioners Act, 1869. MOTIONS. ■ On the motion of Mr. Burns, the. names of Sir R. Douglas and Mr. Travers were added to the committee appointed to enquire into the weather reporting and storm signalling depart-' ment. ■ ... j Mr. MAC ANDREW moved, and it was carried, that the name of Mr. Bastings be added to the Waste Lands Committee. ; Mr. BUNNY moved, on behalf of Mr. Travers, —That a select committee, consisting of the Hon. the Minister for Public Works, the Hon. Mr. Richardsen, Messrs, Hunter, Bunny, Ballauce, Rolleston, Reader Wood, and the mover (three to be a quorum), be appointed to inquire and-report to this House upon the suitability for railway construction of a line of road leading from the Upper Hutt to Pahautanui, and from thence by the Horokiwi Yalley to Waikanae, with a view to the connection of Wellington with the Foxton and Palmerston Railway by that route; and as to the expediency of 'an immediate survey of the same. The committee to have power to call for papers and persons, and to report in a fortnight.— : Carried. ■ Mr. SWANSON moved, —That the select committee, to whom was referred the question <jf the best means of introducing and establishing the manufacture of beet-root sugar in the colony do consist of the Hon; Mr. McLean, Messrs. Murray, Burns, J. C. Brown, Sharp, Macfarlane, Hamlin, and the mover ; three to be a quorum ; with power to call for persons and papers, and to report within three weeks, j—Carried. . Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Sheehan, that the petition of J. A, Wilson, presented on 2nd inst., be printed. Mr. J. E. BROWN moved, —That a committee be appointed to inquire into and report !on the present system of management of the railways-of the colony. The committee to 'consist of the Hon. Mr. Ormond, Mr. Reader |Wood, Mr. Maoandrew, Mr. Seymour, Mr. Bunny, Mr. Curtis, and the mover. Three to jbe the quorum; to have power to call for persons and papers, to take evidence, and to i report within one month, l The Hon. Major ATKINSON recognised (that Such a committee would be able to render (valuable service; but he should like to see a larger number, of names on the committee, and igave notice of his intention to move certain i additions to it. The motion was then put and ! carried. . ' ' • The .Hon. .Mr. REID moved, and it was i carried, —That the Sheep and Cattle Bill be ! referred to a select committee of „ eighteen i members,.to consider and report on the provi- ; sions of such Bill, with power to confer or sit ! together! with any similar committee which ; may he appointed by the legislative Council, and to make a joint or separate report. Such committee to consist of Mr. Cox,'Mr, Williams, Captain Russell, Hon. Mr. Ormond, Mr. Beetham, Mr. Bryce, Mr. Richmond, Mr. Murray-Aynsley„ Mr. Harper, Mr. Tesohemaker, Captain Morris, Mr. Seymour, Captain Kenny, Mr. Wasdn,'Mr., Thomson, Mr. Joyce, Dr. Hodgkinson, and the mover. Five to be a quorum, and to report within ten days. PROPOSALS FOR RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION. - The interrupted debate on the motion of Mr. Maoandrew as to the construction of ; certain lines of railway in the provincial district of Otago was resumed. • Mr. BASTINGS strongly supported the motion, and suggested that it should be referred'to a select committee. He moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr. READER WOOD opposed the motion. . Mr..MAOANDREW, in consideration of tho faot that the Government intended bringing down a Bill which possibly might meet the ctee, ; had no objection to the postponement of the motion. - • ; ; a The Hon. Mr. STAFFORD favored the consideration of the question on the' Districts Railway Bill being brought down. . -Messrs. Gisborne and Hodgkinson having spoken, The debate was adjourned till next Thursday. , THAMES OVERDRAFT. Mr. REES moved, —That a select committee, consisting of seven members, be appointed to inquire into the whole of the circumstances under, which the Government paid off the overdraft of the borough ot the Thames. • Mr. ROLUBSTON thought the Government'should before this have given particulars of the case, which seemed to reflect on the Government, showing what influences could ] be brought to bear on them; in support of which he quoted from a newspaper parts of a ; story containing what purported to be statements from the Mayor of the Thames, of a damaging character to the Government. The House was entitled to an explanation. - The Hon. Major ATKINSONsaid he would not satisfy the curiosity of hon. members by making any statement on the subject of any kind';. and moved an amendment that the Public Accounts Committee be directed to inquire into, the circumstances under which the payment in question was made. ■ The Hon. Mr. WHITAKER did not attach much weight to what had been read from the newspaper. It was a report of a meeting held 1 in the Pacific Hotel at the Thames, at which; the Mayor was present, and possibly that gentleman might have been romancing. i After further discussion, the question was put, Major Atkinson’s amendment being carried. ■ , ' NEWMARKET TOLLS. Mr. O’RORKJS moved, and it was carried, — That there be laid before this House, copy of any correspondence that has passed between the Mayor of Onehunga and the Government, claiming a share of the tolls levied at Newmarket on account of the large amount of , tolls paid there by residents at Onehunga, and bn account of the borough being required to - maintain two miles of the road from Onehunga to Auckland.

NATIVE LAND. Oh the motion of Mr. Rees, it was resolved that a return be laid before the House of all lands to the conveyance of which in feesimple by the native owners the consent of his Excellency the Governor has been given during the last three years, together with the names of the persons to whom such lands were sold, and the price respectively paid for the same. REWARDS FOR DISCOVERING GOLDFIELDS. The Hon. Mr. GISBORNE moved,—-That the Goldfields Committee be instructed toreport what rewards, if auy, should be authorised by the House to be offered in the North and South Island, and on what terms, for the discovery ot payable goldfields ; and.. what steps should be taken for the encouragement of prospecting for-' gold and otherprecious minerals. He thought had rewards been offered hitherto the effect would have been to increase the development of the country. Mr. BARFF, in seconding the motion, said the House by voting a few thousands in this direction would secure an increase to the population of the colony, and people, of the best class also, from the neighboring colonies. Mr. JOYCE having addressed the House, the motion was agreed to. PRESS TELEGRAMS. Mr. REES moved, —That a select committee be appointed to inquire whether the telegraph officials peruse Press telegrams, with the view of altering or amending the same, without the consent of the senders. Such committee to consist of the Hon. Mr. McLean, Hon. Mr. Fox, Mr.' Swanson, Mr. Reader Wood, Hon. Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Travers, and the mover. Three to be a quorum; and to report in a week from appointment, -Mr. TOLE seconded, and the Hon. Mr. McLean having cordially agreed with the principle of the motion, and suggested that it should be amended so that the committee should inquire into .what constituted a Press telegram, the motion as amended wasagreed to. kangitikei manawatu block. . The Hon. Mr. FOX moved,—For the production of all papers, including reports or memoranda, if any, of officers of the Native Department relating to. the payment of a sum of £4OOO, or thereabouts,: lately made by the Government to a section of the Ngatiraukawa tribe, in the Rahgitikei-Manawatu block, in excess of the award of the Land Court made in 1869, and of previous payments and reserves made by Sir Donald McLean and Mr. Commissioner Featherston.—Agreed to. , THE FEIEDING. SETTLEMENT. The Hon. Mr. FOX moved, —That the Government be requested td procure and lay before this House, a statement showing the' progress from the commencement and present condition of the Feilding settlement, in the Manawatu District, with tabular statements exhibiting the quantity of land taken up by the Corporation sold to the public, distinguishing : rural, suburban, and town, with - the average price of each class and the total amount'received, or. to be received if sold oh' credit; the length of roads constructed, defining the character of the same, and whether constructed through bush or open, hilly or > level land; the number of immigrauts intro? duped into the block under the auspices of the Corporation; the amount of rates paid to'the* Manawatu Road Board, and the amount expended by that Board in ; the Manchester block; the gross total expenditure of the Corporation in connection with the undertaking; ■ and any general information which may enable the House to understand the position and prospects of the enterprise.—Carried. RAILWAY PASSES. Mr. SHARP moved that the resolution of the House requesting, the Government tG grant free passes oh the railways be rescinded. Dr., Wallis seconded, and Mr; Joyce and Mr. Murray also spoke. ORDERS OF THE DAT. The House then proceeded to the orders of the day. ( The Dunedin Drillshed Reserve Bill was read a second time,' on the motion of Mr. Stout. * J. The Invercargill Gasworks Loan Bill was read a second time, on the motion of Dr. Hodgkinson. ? " Several orders of the day were postponed. LOCAL OPTION BILL. * The Hon. Mr. FOX, in rising to move the second reading of this Bill, was ’received with cheers. He said, before proceeding to explain the provisions of the Bill, he desired to make one or two remarks somewhat of a personal nature. In the first instance, he must explain why the hon. member for Dunedin City—who had carried the second reading of a Bill similar in provision to this through the House last year—had not again taken charge of it.; Certainly he was entitled to the honor; but it 1 'was at the special request of that hon. gentleman that he (Mr. Fox) had assumed the responsibility of the Bill; He felt that the’ House had lost by the change in having to listen to an old story from him, instead of < hearing an. eloquent address from the* hon.member far Dunedin City (Mr. Stout), and at the same time; he estimated highly the privilege which had fallen to him—that of introducing a Bill to help on the cause of the poor, the cause of the working man, the cause of the home. It had once been stated by his hon. friend Sir Julius Vogel that the Work of colonisation was the work of building up homes; but he was sorry that he had never ; been able to persuade his hon. friend that the liquor traffic, as regulated in this colony, was a huge ageuoy for destroying homes. He felt it was so, and this Bill had for its object the'prevention of the dismantlement and the ruin i of the working classes. 'There was another pointAnticipating this Bill, he believed the organisation known as the Good Templars had prepared and sent to.eanh.member.of the House a circular on the subject, and this had been couched in such terms that several hon. members complained that it savored of intimidation. •Ho had been sorry to see such a circular sent, and he regretted exceedingly that certain persons engaged in eo good a cause 'should be so far carried away by their enthusiasm as to injure the cause, for he must admit that the ob-' jectiona made to the circular were to a certain' extent justifiable. But" he trusted that no members of the House would be bo affected in their judgment as t,o visit the follies of certain people by, voting against the Bill. Referring to the, petitions which .had been sent in in favor; of the Bill, containing signatures to the.;,number of nearly 6000, and promising *, more, , which , would bring up the signatures in favor , of, the Bill to 1 about 15,000, 1 he proceeded to give some short account of the measure he was ,about to-ask the House to read a second time. The principle ife contained was t not a new principle either to the House or to the colony, for it was already on the statute,book. In 1871 a Bill, the provisions of which Were precisely similar in character to those of the present Bill, was introduced by him and carried without a division, but was lost sight of in committee. In the following year the Bill was again introduced, this time carried by a narrow majority, but got no further.- However, in 1873. the House had become thoroughly converted on the subject, and the second ■ reading, was carried not only without a division but with the approval of the entire House, and the Bill. passed through committee and became k law. But in its progress through committee-it was sadly manipulated, and errors and ’defects crept into it. In. 1874 an amending Bill was brought in, and a very cunning Bill it was; but the feeling was so strong against any interference with the principle of local option that the Government were compelled' to withdraw it. Then last session the hen. member for Dunedin City (Mr. Stout) introduced this Local Option Bill; audit passed its second reading. Sothattheprinoipleof local optionhad on five separate occasions been accepted by the House, and was now on the statute book of the colony.; In 1873 the House had declared that the control of publichouses.should vest in the power of a majority of the male and female adults of any district; that declaration stood there to the present day ; and therefore he was relieved to a, great extent of the necessity of debating this principle. Four times it had been debated at . great length ; and was not all that had been said and all that could be said written in .Hansard ? The principle had been on the statute book for. nearly six years ; and what was it after all ? A very simple thing

—that the male and female adults of a*"district should have the;power of determining whether there should be within that district any facilities for the sale of intoxicating liquors. Previous to the acceptance by the Legislature of the principle ' of local option, the principle in force here—it was the same the Home country now—was this: The law had created a gigantic institution, which the law itself clearly recognised was productive of the greatest evils, and fraught with the greatest perils and dangers to the State. That had been proved to be the fact. And holy had they attempted to deal with it ?. They had attempted to render it as innocuous as it was possible to be rendered by attempting, to regulate it, and the result had been that after some four or five hundred Acts of Parliament had been passed, the traffic was becoming more gigantic, more terrible in its consequence, and more unwieldy every day. It had become a great question, a burning question, in the old country —a question which, for the interest it attracted, had not been equalled in magnitude. So far as he could remember he never knew hut one or two subjects which had led to the introduction of two Bills into the House of Commons during one session; but last session of tbe House of Commons there were no less than seven > Acts- introduced ; this year eight Acts had already been introduced, and he had the authority of .the Licensed Victuallers' Gazette for saying there would yet be a dozen. Now, all these endeavors to provide a remedy for the evils of the traffic by regulation had failed, and the advocates of local option. said they wanted the law entirely reversed— they wanted the law altered so that the liquor traffic could be dealt with just in the same practical way in which men were used to treat the. affairs of everyday life. If a malignant disease broke out in a city—say this Empire City of Wei l ” lington—would the citizens expect to see the sanitary authorities set about getting ways and means to erect great fever hospitals, to fee all the medical men that could be found for the purpose of curing those affected ? Certainly not. They would expect to see the Inspector of Nuisances, with a long nose and a keen smell, with a broom sweeping away the seeds of typhus in the shape of impure sewage. That would be the proper way to deal with the matter. What had Mr. Plimsoll done when he had reason to believe that many thousands of seamen were sacrificed to the love of filthy lucre on the part, of men who sent rotten ships to sea in order to get large sums of insurance. When he got the facts he did not .go to the House of Commons and ask that three magistrates should be appointed, from whom a captain must get'a; license to sell, and ask for constables .to see that captains did their duty. No; he asked the House of Commons to pass a law that no rotten ships should be allowed to leave a harbor; and that struck at the root of the matter. Prevention was better than cure. That was the motto of the friends, of-local option. The remedy of the regulating system was to cure. That had been found impossible; then let them try prevention—it was better than cure. - It was no use, as a speaker in the old country had said (he thought it was tbe Archbishop of York), to attempt to plaster the system with Acts of Parliament. The new system must be tried. He was aware that he might be told that the means were quite unequal to the object: that it was impossible to. alter a vast system by a Bill ,pf three pages.' * The solution of social problems, as the solution of mechanical problems; were of ten found to depend upon small par-, ticiilars. ' He cited the history of the invention of the sewing machine as an instance of great results flowing from trifling discoveries. They had found that under the existing law the eye of the magistrate and the great big bulls-eye of, the policeman could do nothing; then let them try what the eye of the people could do. He "must explain what the eye of the people was! ■ Here in 1 New Zealand they had de-’ cided not to allow anyone to sell intoxicating liquor, except under special license, to be granted by certain persons. What was the result? They had a public-house for every 200 or 300 people, 'and a great monopoly was granted to certain favored individuals. The magistrates themselves were nominated by the central Government, without their pretending to having any sympathy-with the wishes of the people of the- -district, and—inr-some instances their jnteresta were identical with those of the publican and inimical to those of the people. However,'he did not wish to interfere with their powers, except in one respect; and, in fact, he thought when the Bill was looked into it would be found to be a pattern of moderation. --The first thing the Bench had to decide was that the applicant was a man qualified to sell liquor, and what sort of a man he must he. He (Mr. Fox) ; would' almost go ‘so far as to say such a man could scarcely be found in that House., He (Mr. Fox) must admit be was not qualified. Why he must be highly respectable, he must have a wonderful power of perception, for he’ must know the precise amount which each man can carry, not only one man, but every customer; because if he gave him a-glassmore than‘ he could comfortably carry then the publican- was liable to be fined. They did not propose to interfere with that power of the magistrates. The next thing the magistrates had to do was to ascertain whether the house for which a license was applied for was of such a character that it should be licensed. As the man was to be a mao among men, the house must be a house among houses. There must be a certain number of rooms, the bar must he in. a particular place, there must be stables ' and other conveniences. They would not presume to interfere with that function; but there was another function, at present held by the Bench, which the Local Option Bill proposed to take—that was that the people of the district should be the sole judges as to whether there was a necessity for the houses for which licenses were applied for. That was the whole object of the Bill. There was no great revolution in that; nothing to upset the foundation of the State ; nothing to tear the Constitution to tatters. Let the people themselves have the power of deciding whether there was any necessity for publichouses in the district, and then let the magistrates grant the licenses-if they liked. It might be asked, if this local option principle had been on the statute book so long, how was it that If had effected ho good ? Simply for this reason—that as the Bill was passed through committee it was so mutilated that the whole machinery for providing for a proper expression, of opinion being had from the people was swept avay. The vote was left to be exercised in the shape of voluntary memorials got up by one—by the “manin the street.” He had predicted such a mode of obtaining the vote would result in failure, and it had so resulted. There were two causes which contributed to failure. The first was this it was left to the Govern--ment to define the licensing districts, and they had performed that duty properly. In a memorandum he had submitted to’ the Government after the passage of the Act of 1873,.he pointed out that there should be a district for every cluster of public-houses, so that the people who were immediately interested in the continuance or discontinuance of the houses might be able to give a direct expression of opinion. For instance, in-the Wairarapa there were a number of townships each with a cluster of public-houses. There was Masterton with five or six, Carterton with three or four, Greytown with three or four, Featherstonwith one. Aseparatedistriot should be formed for each, so that the persons in the neighborhood of each might have the opportunity of expressing an opinion. If that suggestion had- been given effect to there would, he believed, have been a great many houses in the country done away with. The ment did not carry out these suggestions, but left it to the Besident Magistrates to define their own districts; and the result was that the districts formed were so largo that it was practically impossible to obtain a vote of two-thirds of the people. He would give the House an instance of what occurred in a locality in the provincial district of Auckland, where people were prevented from ridding themselves of this great evil 'in consequence of the ill-advised manner in which, the districts had been defined. Writing from Princess-street, Auckland, this was what a gentleman said of the difficulties a large class of inhabitants had met with “ We live in

: the suburbs of Auckland, orrather the west of Newton, near the residence of the late John Williamson, Esq. ; - There - are no public-houses very near; the neighborhood is quiet, and gradually growing. A person, however, has cast an evil eye on our quiet neighborhood, and thinks there is an opening there for a publichouse; and he is talcing steps for that purpose, although about three-quarters of the residents in ‘ the neighborhood do not want their peace disturbed by the introduction of a place of the kind, there being a good many Good Templars among us. If a public-house were opened, it . would, as you are aware, be a nice walk from the city, and out of the eyes of the police; and we fear that it would become a perfect pandemonium. Can you, sir, give us. any advice or assistance in the way of stopping the proposed ereotiouyof a public house here,- for I myself have a perfect horror of such places, and having been myself an old hand at opposing them, they would rejoice at my discomfiture in having a public-house right under my nose. You will say, Why not opposeitin the legal way by canvassing the district for the signatures of - two-thirds, 1 and so prevent the publican from obtaining a’license.; Well, sir, there is the rub. If the licensing district were the Arch . Hill Highway District, we could shut them up smart; but it is impossible to canvass the whole of the Newton Licensing District, as it includes the following highway districts, viz.:—Newton, TCarangahape; Ponsonby, Arch Hill, Eden-terrace, Mount Albert, and Point Chevalier, embracing an area of about seven miles by four miles, thickly populated. If- the householders of the Arch Hill District alone had to settle the question, I should hardly have had to trouble you.” Here, continued Mr. Fox, was an example of how the present law worked. Here a number of people, desirous of preventing the introduction into their neighborhood of what they jvery'properly regarded as an unmitigated evil, were prevented from doing so, even according to law, because there were half a dozen other districts included in the licensing district within which those people resided. He give to the House other instances of the kind. - He might take the Wairoa District iu Auckland, which was 100 miles across, fifty miles wide, and had no less than twenty distinct townships in it. Notwithstanding the difficulties presented by this state of things, a set of young men : succeeded in canvassing’ the district, incurring thereby an expenditure of £4O; and they were poor men he would have it remembered, and could ill afford to lose either their time or money. They endeavored to get the name of every inhabitant : of that district; and in consequence visited the houses; but during the time spent in this self-imposed task they found not more than one-half the people at’home. Consequently they’failed; and yet in some of the minor districts it was a fact that eighty out of every hundred would give their signatures against the granting of a license, and in one or two cases, he believed, the people were unanimous. This failure to carry out the-permissive principle was due simply to the absurd definition of the licensing district, as made by the persons , whom the Government employed. He had told them of the first failure, and now he would proceed to tell them of failuie the second. ' Before doing so, however, he wouW say by way of parenthesis that he did not propose to interfere with the present licensing districts; hut he proposed to enable the residents in any one part of the district to call upon the Chairman of the Licensing Bench' to create a sub-district confined to such and such an area, and prevent the establishment of a public-house within it, and thus carry out the object desired. He would now refer to the second ground of failure under the existing state of things. It was the vo!untary method of objection ; there being no machinery-provided for carrying out the principle of the law. He proposed to substitute, a simple method of domestic ballot. ;as he might call it, namely, the practice of sending round to every house voting papers This was a considerable: improvement'on the ordinary, ballot. The object of those who supported the cause of temperance was to obtain the object desired, itt which the present law signally failed. He had now referred to the -principle of the Bill, and he had also shown the House the simplicity of its machinery. The principle, in fact, • was as simple as the machinery. Members would observe one important point in which the Bill before the House differed from the measure of 1873,’which gave the power of veto to two-thirds of- the inhabitants in any licensing district. That principle was copied from the Permissive Bill pf the Imperial Parliament, by whom it was considered that in dense centres of population such as there are in England, where the Act was put in force it should have the moral force of a large majority of the people. But the state of 'society here was different to what it was in the old country, and he saw no reason why in respect to this question they should not adopt:that constitutional principle which prevailed in the colony, namely, the power of Va majority, of one to settle any quessioh.. Did not members of that House, as representing the people, come there on that principle ? At least they might find themselves in the position of being elected to a seat in the House by a majority of one. And why, he would ask, should they ,not make that principle apply to a question So intimately cimnectecl with the happiness and prosperity ' of the ; people as was , that of the law which , dealt with the control of the liquor traffic? This was one material alteration, which. it was proposed to make. But there was another provision contained in this Bill, which was hardly provided for in that of the hon. member for Dunedin, Mr. Stout. That gentleman had limited the power of veto to ratepayers. It must be observed, however, that the number of female ratepayers was exceedingly: small, and to meet this objection, he (Mr. Fox) proposed that everyone over the age of twenty-one should have the power to vote on this important question. Why should not women have the power to vote ? Who were more interested than they? Was not the history of many women one long scene of misery, their hearts broken, their husbands broken . down both physically and mentally, their; children left destitute; and at the root of all this misery was that great evil—intemperance. Who then so entitled to have a voice in suppressing the' traffic in liquor as those who suffered most by its baneful influence?, , Wherever the principles of morality were concerned there they might rest assured would the women give abetter vote than the men, whose precepts in this respect were not followed by example; a very good reason for which was that they were exposed to temptations of a kind unknown in the life of the gentler sex. He had now, he thought, laid the whole of the matter before ■ the House;, but before concluding he desired to say something regarding a few objections which he knew would be raised against the Bill before the House. It would probably be called unconstitutional to take a vote of all the people on a matter of this kind—whether iu fact such an Act should be brought into operation or not. It a plebiscite they would say. Call it Napoleonic. But what oared he. if it were Napoleonic. What was in a name, when as against it was to be balanced the good of the State—the Welfare of the people at large? The question was pne of’ the vastest importance, as hon. gentlemen knew, and one which had for centuries demanded the attention of the Imperial Parliament.- There was another point in the Bill on which he feared he should be opposed by gentlemen with whom he should desire to go into the same lobby. This objection was rather in the nature of what is commonly known as drawing a red herring across the scent. A cry had been got _ up that if the proposals of the Bill were carried they should pay compensation to the publicans, who would not be fairly dealt with if the provisions of the Bill were carried into effect. Well, in regard to that, all he had to say was that he would not hurt. the hair of a publican’s - head on any account; ’ nor did he propose to do so. But why, he asked, should the publican receive compensation ? Was it because the Bench should refuse to renew a license for his public-house, which was only granted him for one year? Would you pay a yearly, tenant compensation for ejecting him from a house which is your property [ Why, then, should a publican, whose house is closed so far as the sale of liquor is concerned, receive compensation ? It might be said, and was said by some, that there was an understanding

-always that the ■ licenses would be renewed; but he scarcely understood with whom such an understanding could be arrived at—certainly not with the thousands of persons who signed those petitions before the House. , It was with the Licensing Bench he supposed; that the publican came to his understanding. The Bench would no doubt say to him, “ You are a -jolly fellow, and. your license is granted, and if you -do not misbehave yourself you shall have it again. But there was, in fact, no continuity—no vested interest; the publican was simply granted a privilege for a term, which he could make the most of by filling his pocket with the large profit made in the traffic. There was no analogy between this class of persons and those who possibly would be refined gentlemen holding high official positions in England who had received: Compensation, because the latter held a life tenure of office/ The licensed victualler had his compensation be-, forehand, because he had been a huge monopoly which has enabled him to coin money in the pursuit of his trade, and yet when, the term of his license expired he was to ! receive compensation if a renewal was refused. He (Mr. Fox) had never heard of such. a thing in all his life. . What were the investments of the publicans ? They were simply from month to month or week to week. . He was always in the same position, and making a gigantic profit out of it because of the monopoly allowed to him. It not proposed to take away his stock with his license; he could take it to the next town and do what he pleased with it; neither was it intended to take away his house. Of course he kuevy it might be said that the refusal to renew a license for a house would be greatly to reduce its value; but then it must be clearly remembered that the value previously-set upon such a house was only gained by that very monopoly to which he had alluded. If the publicans would reduce tbe compensation question to the principle of balancing one account against another, as two men of business would do on coming to a settlement, then he would agree with them. Ha might in .this connection quote the words of a gentleman to whom he had previously referred, and say to the publicans—f‘You have filled our gaols, our lunatic’, asylums, pur almshouses and penitentiaries; we have .been taxed to . support thousands in consequence of your traffic. Compensate us for this, and'then we willtalk about giving you compensation.” They must remember that they were legislating for lives, widows, and hearths; and in God’s name he would say let them be just, and not be debarred by fear or prejudice from passing a measure which should give to the people the right of choosing for themselves as to whether this evil should be allowed to take deeper root and flourish, whilst casting destruction around, and destroying the peace and happiness of thousands. He did not believe for a moment that there was a man whose - mind was not darkened’ by self-indulgence but must be alive to; the wide spread evil of this liquor traffic, and he claimed the support' of the House on this occasion, not only for. the second reading but in committee, in order that the real object for which he had introduced the Bill might be attained, and prevent the people of this colony having any: claim, to the ■ title which had beenbestowed upon England on the European Continent, namely, a nation of-drunkards. Dr. WALLIS was prepared-to support any Bill which had for its object the suppression of drunkenness ; but. he could not follow the hon. member. who had charge of the Bill. ” He would advocate a Permissive Bill; ! but - the present. Bill was not a permissive measure. There was not a word about compensation in it. The hon. gentleman had boasted about the 10,000 signatures to petitions on the table; but those signatures were obtained from persons whd.Mmagihed they were a permissive measure. He thought it would be better to take a more moderate measure to put down, drunkenness. The Bill was undoubtedly a confiscation Bill.. The hon. gentleman had asked what interest a publican had ? He (the speaker) considered that the publican had as great an interest as any other gentleman in business. It was said publicans’ .business was injurious to the health and morality of the people. But that was not the question. It should not be treated as a’ moral question. The Legislature was bound to look upon it from a business-point of view ; and if it contemplated to pay compensation, where were the means to do so to come from ? ,He had ho faith in the philanthropy which did good at other peoples expense. With regard to the' manner in which it was proposed to form licensing districts, it was impracticable. The Bill plundered the municipalities and it plundered the'counties.

Mr. FISHER opposed the second reading of the Bill, which began at the wrong end of the matter it proposed to deal with. He objected to the species of threats held out by teetotallers to bon. members. Recognising the evil of intemperance, he failed to see a cure for it in this Bill. Mr. MANDERS opposed the Bill, , The Hon. Mr. BOWEN pointed out the very strong arguments and facta that could be brought qn either side of the question at issue. However, he had seen so many evils under the present licensing system that he thought it was a reasonable proposal that the decision in, case of a new license should be left to the people of a district. That was all, however, he'was prepared to go with the Hon. Mr. Fox, Unless, indeed, a district prepared to vote for the extinction of public-houses within its limits was prepared to ’ pay compensation to those deprived of their licenses. He pointed out that the proper tendency of all legislation on the licensing question should be to encourage the licensed victualler to make his calling as high and as respectable a one as any other." ' 1 1 Mr. SUTTON could not support the Bill, it was extreme in scope, and unworkable as a piece of legislation. He feared - that the principle of local option as embodied in the Bill would be found to-work in a very arbitrary manner. - , , Mr. BARFF condemned the Bill as a most revolutionary measure. ,It appeared to him that there were other ways by which the evils of intemperance could be lessened. One, of the first effects of prohibition was the springing up of grog shanties, as had-been, the case in Maine, where every second house was turned into a sly-dram shop. • ■ ’ . ; i Mr. HARPER had oppoaed ; ,the Bill last year, and shouldjlo the same this year, as he could not think it Could with any amount of altering be made a workable Bill. . . ; Mr. GISBORNE expressed his intention of voting for the second reading of the Bill. But while he accepted the principle of local option in regard to new houses, he thought, if applied to old houses it must be accompanied by provision for compensation to those .whose licenses were taken from them upon grounds of public policy. The Hon. E. RICHARDSON opposed the Bill. The following gentlemen addressed the House:—Messrs. Bprns, Honi Nahe, Wake-; field, Karaitiana, Thomson, Tawiti, Fitzroy, and Rolleston. Mr. TRAVERS moved the adjournment of the debate till Wednesday next, which was agreed to. The House adjourned at 12.40 a.m.