New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-30
LIQUOR LEGISLATION ~ ENGLAND.

An Interesting contribution to the history Of
excise legislation is made by Mr. Edward For
rift who writes for THE Political Science Quar-
terly" an article on Five Centuries OF Liquor
LEGISLATION in England" In view Of the pres
ent movement for new excise laws and the at
tempt Of certain interests. political and financial
10 foster the notion that the privilege to sell
beer at any and all times is sacred and nacn-
able right, and that any attempt to restrict the
traffic Is a Purtanical invasion Of individual
liberty and an uncomfortable interference with
nroperty rights, It is worth noting what English
oninion on these questions has been at different
times.
The first fact which becomes prominent Is that
there never was moment from the last year
of Edward VI to the first Of William ~ when
the liquor traffic was not considered an evil
TO be regulated and restricted for the public
good. From the beginning of the thirteenth
century the price of beer was fixed, magistrates
had power to suppress disOrdery houses ana
Municipalities controlled resorts, but no general
restrictive measures were taken until the act or
1853 was passed. That was specifically founded
on the declaration that the multiplication Of ale
houses was causing intoerable hurt and trouble.
and it was ordered that no one should keep an
alehouse unless he was licensed by the magis-
trates and gave recognizances for good behavior.
In the first year of James l the internal man
agement Of public houses was undertaken, and
their functions were defined to be the entertain
ment Of travellers not the harborng Of "lewd
land idle people. TO spend and consume their
money and their time in cwd and drunken
manner" Innkeepers were forbidden TO re-
ceive such persons, and fines under the act went
TO the benefit Of the poor, thus early recognizing
the proprey Of making the traffic do something
TO relieve the misery IT caused In 1907 fines
were imposed on brewers who sold TO unlicensed
innkeepers Legislation along these lines was
continued for more than century, more strin-
gent laws being enacted as drunkenness in
creased The consumption Of sprituous liquors,
which had grown to be alarmngly great, led
Parliament in 1876 to establish a high-license
system Retailers Of spirits were compelled to
pay a license fee Of $50 a year, and it was made
a criminal offence for employers to retail spirits
TO their work people. a year later the number
Of licenses was restricted, brewers and others
interested in the traffic were disqualified from
sitting as magistrates fer the granting Of
licenses. a rating qualification was established
for retailers. and II was made impossible to en-
force liquor bills for less than fl and criminal
to take articles in pawn for drink. In 1913 an
applicant for Il license was compelled to have
certificates to his character from the vicar and
certain other substantial men Of the parish, his
license was made good for Il year only, and if
he broke his recOgnizanccs he was disqualified
from innkeeping for three years. These laws
were little changed until 1898. when most of
them were repealed but the principle Of magls
teral control Of the sale Of both beer and spirits
continued.
With 1880 came an era OF free beer. which
lasted until 1869. 1t was the result Of an effort
TO remit tax unnecessary for revenue. at a
point where the people would feel the removal
without ut the same time comforting all the
benefit on the brewers. The great brcweries
Of London had tied to them most OF the licensed
inns and beerhouscs Of the city. Out Of 5000
publicans only 30 brewed their own beer. That
system was then largely confined to the vicinity
Of London while at present the brewers control
by mortgages or actually own threequarters Of
the beerhouses of England. To prevent the
brewers from pocketing the RENTED tax the
sale of beer was thrown open to all comers in
spite OF the cry Of vested interests which was
raised Those who raised it were bluntly told
that it was absurd to talk Of vested interests in
a trade the regulation Of which might be varied
by Parliament at any time for the public good
A further reason for this policy was the dread
that the poorer classes were becoming the vie
tins of spirit drinking. and 1t was thought that
free beer might improve their habits. But this
was far from being the case. Within four years
Of the passage of the act $1,000 becrshops came
into existence, and in the neighborhood Of Lon
don most Of the places were in the hands Of the
large brewers. who sold most unwholesome beer,
and it was said the law had signally failed Of It's
purpose and had cngendered enormous social
abuses. Nevertheless, this in the main con-
tlnued to be the law Of England until 1869. and