The Sun.
London, England, 1868-10-16 00:00:00

CONSIDERABLE success in the past and much more
promise for the future, was justly claimed at the
annual meeting of the United Kingdom Alliance.
The war against the liquor traffic is clearly making
progress. Its justice is rapidly being acknowledged
by the nation, and the Legislature, which formerly
knew no argument against the greatest evil from which
the nation suffers, has long ago learned to treat the
other side of the question with respect, and is more
and more according it support. The annual meeting
held on Tuesday was more than usually successful.
The proceedings chewed that the most important
principle of the war against the liquor traffic
was fast gaining ground. The great work of
the Alliance has been not to prove the existence
of the evil against which it strives, nor to convince
people that its suppression would be a blessing;
but to spread the conviction that intemperance could
never be wholly overcome by moral persuasion or by
any influence short of legislative enactment. The
malady is wholly beyond such treatment. The
argument that men cannot be made moral by
Act of Parliamenk.has its place ; but it is quite out of
place in a case where men have been made immoral
by Acts of Parliament, and the injury can be repaired
only by means similar to that which inflicted it.
We are far from saying that the Parliaments which
have rejected measures even to moderately repress
the liquor traffic have not acted according to their
convictions ; but it is certain that the spread of
intemperance is very largely owing to the
granting of facilities and the refusing of restric-
tions on the sale of drink. Intemperance, indeed,
occupies a position which would be indignantly denied
to any other vice. It is promoted by a distribution of
poison so uncontrolled as to pollute even the portion
of society to which it is repugnant ; it is supported
by temptations which in many instances wholly
neutralise the free agency of the individual. As
a mixture of the strong and the weak, mankind can
never be tempted by facility to vice without vice

itself being the inevitable consequence. And when
to these considerations is added the argument
that the advocates of restrictions would always decide
its employment by the same method which
decides every other national question—the
voice of the majority the logic in favour
of permissive legislation against the liquor
traffic becomes overwhelming. The only plea
that can be brought against the total sup-
pression of this disgraceful trade vanishes. The
arguments against a law which is to be enforced only
by a large majority proceed simply from a self-
interest in the preservation of the trade which the
voice of the people might remove. And here we
have a curious instance of the inconsistency of the
opposition to the Permissive Bill. On all
other questions it is argued that the genius
of English institutions is against centralisation.
Education, municipal government, and all other
branches of administration which do not affect the
country in bulk must be local. But the opposition
to permissive legislation is merely a plea for one form
of centralisation. if a majority can be secured iu
the House of Commons, the country must be satisfied.
The section of the public which supports the decision
of the House of Commons must be predominant
everywhere. Whether the inhabitants of any town
shall or shall not be subjected to the moral
corruption and public nuisance attendant upon the
sale of drink is, on many accounts, as much a local
question as drainage. One decision must, how-
ever, do for all. The House of Commons, which
would cause almost a revolution by saddling every
town in the kingdom with a free library, can with
perfect justice impose a large percentage of the
public-houses, whether the inhabitants desire them
or not.

It is upon the growth of popular feeling in
favour of this local administration that the success of
the Permissive Bill must depend. And in this
respect the Alliance has not been stationary. Mr.
ABEL Small's bill, for instance, must be deemed a
great success. .It has not become law, but its mos t
vehement opponent must admit that a measure which
but three or four years ago would have been as
unfavourably received as a scheme to disestablish
the Irish Church, but which last session was but
narrowly defeated, has attained a dangerous position.
Mr. SMITH'S bill does not propose permissive enact-
ment, but it belongs to the same class of legislation—
a class which not long ago was as unknown to
"Hansard" as to the statute-book. Indeed, a Per-
missive Bill would be supported by many who would
reject absolute legislation, even of the most restricted
character. The select committee did great ser-
vice to the cause. "Impartially chosen," as its
members were, they had no difficulty in
rejecting the bill ; but, unfortunately, they were
obliged to issue their report. Their conclusions
might have done very well if they had not published
the arguments upon which they were founded. The
accumulation of testimony given before the select
committee has been invaluable. Many who thought
moral persuasion the sole remedy for England's
disgrace in the eyes of Europe have been
convinced that for an evil sui generic a remedy of
like kind is required. Archbishop MANNING, for
instance, has relinquished moral persuasion and
decided in favour of enactment. Amongst candidates
for the House of Commons the Permissive Bill has
made way; many are openly declaring for it, and many
more reserve their decision. In the expiring Parlia-
ment the question notoriously progressed. Agree-
ment amongst candidates to have no committee-
rooms in public-houses is likely to have some
effect in deciding the forthcoming election
less .by beer than by principle. As to the
sinews of war, the Alliance is not deficient; the
subscription list and the guarantee fund are both in
a flourishing condition. Amongst the religious bodies
the movement gains further strength. There is
every reason to believe that the campaign Will be
greatly advanced in the next Parliament, if indeed
it be not altogether determined. In the meantime,
action during the appeal to the hustings is of the first
importance. The Permissive Bill should in every
instance be made a direct issue between the candidate
and the electoro,