The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-05-17 00:00:00

eke 3tourkrittge elserirer.

iATURDAY, MAY 17, 1873.

THE PERIISSIVE BILL.

Whilst we have every desire to hominy the
oonecientions motives which prompt Sir Wilfrid
L swoon end his supporters to introluce seseuri
after session their Permissive Prohibitory Bill,
It is to be hoped that after the crushing, defeat
it sustained a few evenitera age, is the House of
Commons, we he ir no more about it.
Perhtips for many ye.. , the British Parliament
has never had sub flitted for its consideration a
bill whieb. lied it passed into law, would have
Introduced so many new and strange principles
into the Ciristitution, not only by becoming te
its app'ication a perpetual source of strife aid
dimension, but curtailing to a great extent the
liberty ef the stillest, cud destroying one of the
largest sources of revenue of which this country
mu boast The intention and situ of the Per.
nissive Bill is too well known to need much, if
any, exptanstion from u•t. Shortly, it would
!iv,. tit the ritepeyers the power of deciding by
vote whetoer the sale of alcoholic liquors should
et permitted or prohibited in their township or
terish ; should two thirds of them be against
such sale, then their decision would take imme-
diate effeet, and every keeper of a public-house
or a beershop would h compelled to close his
premises under pain of the he ivy peivilties at
..resent indicted only on those who all iutoxi-
eating drink without license.
Nos it does not require a very acute intellect
1 to discern the many grave and serious conse-
quences which would he brought about by the
idoption of such a system. In the first place it
is contrary to all oar notions of justice and fair
play that the majority should wield the power
of interfering with the social habits of a mino-
rity. Why should a thousand inhabitants of a
parish be deprived of the means of obtsining
malt or spiritauns liquors because two thousand
ither inhabitants have arrive! at the conclusion
ant iudulgence in such tastes is eiving way to
in ungodly and depraved craving P or why
•honlii the publican, who is engaged in carrying
in a business which Parliament licenses and
consequently recognises, be suddenly deprived
if his means of existence, because the Good
tramplers or the Alliancites have managed to
:ork up the people of the neighbourhood into
state of temperance zeal and fervour ? Unless
.he 81 gentlemen who voted in favour of this
measure can produce a complete and satisfactory
answer to such objections as these, there is
very possibility that :hide pet, scheme will he
Ideated by a still larger majority thin 240
seould they veuturo again to introduce it. But
3 is of little use to urge arguments founded on
'air play and justice to thee, whin fanaticism
its blinded, and ferthtt •,-15 there are others
cased on cotutunn sem .id political expediency
Yhich can be brought to hear on the question.
itre will suppose that the Permissive Bill has
oecome the law of the land, and that the two
idjacent towns of Stoke Pogis the Little and
ilreat Siddlecombe ate in the throes of electoral
strife, and in the end the Stoke Pogians come
..co the conclusion that the drink triadic is a great
evil and the curse of the nation, Set , de., whilst
.ue rthildlecouthians on the other hand prefer
worldly comforts and decide upon allowing
their taverns to remain open. What is to pre-
. eat the people of the former town, who have
teen deprived by their fellow inhabitants of the
sossibility of obtaining a glass of ale migrating
in crowds to Biddhcombe. there to indulge in
the amber fluid. Carry the same supposition
o London; imagine for one moment every pub-
lie-house closed in Marylebone, and in St Pan-
cras all such estabtishmeutasipen What would
oc tile result I Simply this, that if there was
any excess of consumption in St. Pancras, it
would be inteusitied and concentrated by the
wane which the thirsty souls of Marylebone
would bring to it. In another point of view the
publicans of one parish would be beggars, and
di the other parish would be making tsice as
ouch as they did formerly. This is but an un-
derdrawn sketch of the inconsistencies which
would be brought about by the operation of
such a law, aid deeply as we regret the preval-
ence of intemperate halede, we cannot uut re•
tiord our opinion that an attempt to make a
initiou sober by force is a step in the wrong di-
rection. Moral restraint and the inculcation
.u6O the masses of hnbite of thrift and industry,
winned situ the spread uf education and in-
telligence, may do much to remedy as un-
doubted evil, and the fact that drunkenness
mie, in proportion to the increased population,
teereased of late years, proves that such in-
dunces as these are beginning to make their
effect.