The Licensing Law

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 52, 22 July 1914, Page 5

The Licensing Law

SECOND ft-KADING OF AMENDING .MEASURE. : PUKAIIKH FAVORS REDUCTION OF MAJORITY. KINO COUNTRY COMMISSION SUftl JEST E!>.' , By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Sight. In the House of Representatives tonight, Mr. Massey moved the second reading of the Licensing Amendment -Bill. He said he was convinced that every member of the House had made up his mind how he was going to vote on the Bill, therefore it needed little explanation. He would have preferred to have been able to introduce a consolidating measure, dealing with all the required amendments in the licensing law, hut pressure of business before Parliament precluded that. He dealt with the views put before him by the respective deputations, and expressed the hope that the discussion of the measure would be friendly in spirit and the minority loyally abide 'by the decision, whatever it might be. THE PRINCIPAL PROPOSAL

was the reduction of the majority required to carry no-license or to restore licenses, and for that he took the wjole responsibility. The discrimination made between local no-license and national option was necessary to put the question on the broadest basis. Personally, he was not in favor of the bare majority on either question, and the majority fixed in the Bill was a proper one. The other clauses were more or less machinery clauses. WT A PARTY MEASURE. The measure was not a party one. In the ballot paper there were only two issues put to the people: National continuance, or National prohibition. That was as plain and simple as it could be. Tlie clause dealing with barmaids was now, lie thought, unnecessary, owing to the decision of the Supreme Court a few days ago, and when the 'Bill got into committee he proposed to strike the clatise out. In conclusion, he impressed upon the 1 House the fact that the carrying of prohibi- ■ tion would necessitate tnc re-adjust-ment of the finances of the country, but he had no fear as to the future, and he thought they would he able to carry ] on the government just as well under prohibition a,s under licenses. STATE CONTROL WILL NOT DO.

He had looked into the Gothenburg system, and was now convinced that the less the State had to do with State control the better. He proposed to ask the House to agree to further amendments dealing with the sale and manufacture of Austrian wine. The question of tied houses would also be dealt with. The state of affairs in the King Country also required attention. Europeans now out-numbered the natives, and were claiming the right to have a vote. He favored the setting up of a Commission to enquire into the state of affairs in the King Country, and if they came back next election lie hoped to bring in a consolidating measure dealing with the whole question.

WHERE ARE THE MINISTERS? Sir Joseph Ward said lie never gave a, silent vote on any question, and lie was not going to now. He declared that after the Premier had met the deputations that waited on him, no one could .tell what his position was. Ho wanted to know what atttiudc the Ministers were taking towards the Bill. It was generally understood that at least six Ministers were against the Bill, and if not sanctioned and approved by the majority of Cabinet, the House should know the fact. When lie had brought down the Licensing Hill he had made it clear that it was a Government Bill, but now the Premier was trying to divest himself of his responsibility by declaring that they were not policy proposals.' That was nothing but cool, colossal assurance, and such a system was a menace to futiire government. If Ministers were not with their Premier upon an important question sucli a", this, their clear duty was to tender their resignations before tile elections. Mr. Massey had pledged himself to the three-fifths majority. After coming into office he had changed his opinion, but had surrounded himself with Ministers whp were still in favor of the thrrrfiftlis majority. Personally, lie would carry out his public pledge to his constituents and vote for the second- muling of the Bill. He was not in favor of State control, but he felt thaf'jf prohibition were carried in the Dominion there would be a strong movomeiv! in favor of some form of State control. HON. W. ERASER OPPOSES T.") BHJL.

Hon. W. Fraser said he was going to oppose the reduction of the majority. He was pledged that way, and was going to carry out his promises.' The measure had never been made a party one, and the Ministers were just as free to exorcise their right to vote as private members. The issue was much too serious to be determined by a bare majority. Prohibition would result in a crop of private stills and informers, and those evils would be worse than any that could arise from the licensed trade. ME. WILFORTyB WAY.

Mr. Wilford said lie was not in favor of prohibition under any circumstances, and least of-all in favor of local nolicense. If it would be accepted, he would vote for 55 per cent, for Rational prohibition, and so settle the question. Jf such an amendment could not bo accepted, he would vote against the Bill. He' protested against the loss of licenses by hotels being transferred into dry districts. Br. Newman stated that he had always been in favor of the three-fifths majority, 'because a substantial majority was necessary to determine the question where such large interests were concerned. Prohibition only created DECEIT AND SLY DRINKING.

Mr. Atmore said the figures quoted by tlie (Attorney-General would make anyone pause and seriously consider whether any real benefit had been accomplished by twenty years' legislation. There was the extraordinary paradox of the vote for no-license increasing alongside the growth of the drink bill and convictions for drtmkei®ess. What would happen if all the people voted no-licensp, and the demand for, liquor continued? FOB THE TIED HOUSES. .Wr. Vigor Brown said it was just as well tlmt tlie House, should'hear both sides of the question. They hart heard a lot about tied houses, nut he pointed out that the tied house had this advantage— the people, knew where the liquor was coming from. , He pointed out that the tied house had the supervision of a man who owned it, and careful super-