THE ASPECT OF THE BEER QUESTION IN AUCKLAND.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2294, 24 July 1880, Page 2

THE ASPECT OF THE BEER QUESTION IN AUCKLAND.

(Auckland i; Herald,” July 12.) The present aspect of the beer question in Auckland cannot be said to bo in any respect settled to the satisfaction of the parties interested, —that is to sa} r the brewers and the publicans, for of course, in a question of this nature the consumers, although they may be said to be reaping the advantage of the unsettled state of the prices, are not by any means considered a factor in the question at issue. When the beer tax was first levied, the Licensed A ictuallers of Auckland held a meeting, and resolved there and then to raise the price of beer to od and (id per pint. Of course the customers demurred, and after a short time the sale of beer was found to have fallen off so much as to alarm the trade. First one gave way to the exigcncies'of the case, and then another : and one publican boldly announced that he had reduced the price of beer at his bouse to dd per pint. Such breaches from the general understanding created a very uneasy feeling, ami the result was that with very few exceptions the publicans took down their placards announcing the rise to lid per pint, and replaced them with the intelligence of the reduction to 4d. The brewers held several meetings on the subject. They were pressed by their customers to promise to pay half the extra dutv, in order to enable them to sell at the hitherto ruling prices, but tbev refused to do so ; meeting after meeting was held to no purpose. Oil Friday' last a conference meeting _ of brewers and publicans was bold, and after some angry recriminations the brewers agreed to bind themselves in bonds of TdOO not to supply any publican who sold at less than od per pint. Mr Seccombo, who from the first bad held out against this agreement, said ho would put it to the voice of the publicans assembled, whether or not he should sign this bond, and they voted unanimously in the affirmative, so he said, “ Thou I will sign it.” This of course brought the business of the meeting to a close, aud every one thought the whole matter was settled, but after the bond was prepared Mr Seccombo thought better of it, and refused to sign. A stormy scone en-

sued, and some unparliamentary language was used, but of course the compact was broken, and every brewer and publican was left to follow his own will. On Saturday numerous publicans posted or chalked notices on their houses, and the landlord of the Britomart Hotel sent his man and board around the city with the inspiring cry of “Ho surrender!” chalked on it. Altogether, things in the beer trade are in an unsatisfactory state, and what may be the upshot of the next ferv days it is hard to say. Perhaps, if the brewers sec the owners of free houses take in hand the project announced of starting a brewery on their own account, they may be inclined to make some concession regarding the duty. Indeed, it is stated that Mr Seccombe has already done so in several instances to his customers, and if he holds out we presume the others will have to follow his example.