" THE TRADE'S " OPPORTUNITY.
" the trade " are wise, they will seize the oppor- tunity to make terms with those who say that the country cannot afford to buy, transport, and consume liquor during. the crisis of the war, and that the energies now spent in these occupations must be turned into channels which will result in the destruction of our enemies and the preservation of ourselves. We have got • to save some- where, and the only way in which we can do so on the huge scale necessary is to put down our glasses during the war. At the moment " the trade " are inclined to claim a vested interest in the drinking habits of the British people, and boldly to assert that they, and not the country or the Government, have the first claim upon the energies and the purses of Englishmen. When " the trade " have taken so many shillings out of, and put so many quarts of beer or glasses of whisky into, the Briton, but not till then, may the Executive use his energies or his purse. If, however, " the trade " are able to read the signs of the times, they will surely see that this is an attitude which the country does not mean to tolerate much longer, and that they had much better make peace with their opponents while they can. Six months hence it may be too late. Instead of resisting schemes for buying them out, " the trade" ought to be considering what is their minimum price and urging the Government to finish the job and let them go. .What is Foing to happen if " the trade" are supine and do nothing, though it may not be apparent to the eyes of their leaders, is plain enough. There are three great tendencies at work to cut away the profits of the sellers of intoxicants, and to destroy the vast and lucrative monopoly which has hitherto belonged to our brewers and distillers. These tendencies are only beginning to exercise their influence at present, but it is a case of tobogganing down a steep hill, and the pace will grow faster and faster. The first of the tendencies is the drastic action taken by the Central Board. Here the writing on the wall is very clear. The Board in various munition areas, and, most important of all, throughout London, has forbidden treating, and has seriously restricted the hours in which drinking is allowed. Except in Glasgow, where the immense prosperity of the wage- earning class has apparently defeated, to a considerable extent, the restrictions, they have very greatly reduced the consumption of liquor, and have wrought a social is:nprovement which can only be described as amazing in its rapidity. i For example, in London the moment the restrictions came into operation the Police Court charges showed an enormous reduction, a reduction which is displayed with sensational force in a chart published in last Saturday's Times. It is not sufficient to talk about the descending curve of police cases. It is a cataract plunge. Nov it is hardly too much to say that in this chart is written, if not the doom of" the trade," at any rate its final warning. If the restriction of hours and the rules against treating can produce this miracle, even when London is full of soldiers on furlough and of well-paid men and women, and denuded of an , unemployed class—i.e., of the class which has not " the price of a pot " in its pocket— bow would it be possible for " the trade " to resist a demand, not only for increased strictness, but for applying the Metropolitan' rules throughout the country ? What is the answer to the cry : " Why should not Somersetshire and Wiltshire and North Wales, and indeed the whole of England, share' in a benefit so huge as that which is indi- cated by the falling of of the Police Court charges in -London " Who would dare to prevent the country from moving down this safe and easy path to the abolition of petty crime ? " The trade " would surely not allege that the Magistrates and the police had a vested interest in the crimes which come from drink, and that therefore there must be no restrictions unless it can be shown that they are absolutely essential to the carrying on of the war. Unquestionably the demand that all England and Scotland should be put under the same rules as London enjoys now will grow, and will in the end prevail. What is good for London, and is found perfectly practicable' there, cannot be regarded as a gross violation of justice and liberty in Compton Dando. That is a proposition which we venture to say the country would find eminently reasonable. Already we see abundant signs that restrictions are •going to be asked for in imperative tones. But restrictions, whatever " the trade " may say, must mean •a serious loss of profit. It is no good for them to hug to their bosoms the delusion that they have beaten the restrictions in Glasgow, and that as much money is coming out of people's pockets there for liquor as before. The only result of that disagreeable fact will be, not a demand for the abandonment of the restrictions as useless, but a demand for closer and more effective restrictions. When newspapers of such a central, position as the Glasgow Herald—a paper with no teetotal leanings or fanatical views on the liquor question —demand, as they have demanded, that the restrictions shall be rendered effective for their purpose by being made stronger, " the trade " will not be able to get very much consolation from this exception to the rule that restriction means low consumption, and therefore less profit. The next tendency which is dangerous to " the trade " is increased taxation. If " the trade," by the exercise of that political influence which they know so well how to manipulate,, manage so to intimidate Ministers that they will not dare to adopt the policy of " Down Glasses during the War," and thereby set the working classes free to save and work their hardest, there is sure to be a movement for higher taxation, on 'the double ground that it will help to increase the revenue and force that part of the 'working classes which is earning high wages to make an increased contribution to the war. In fact, the Treasury will say : " If we cannot divert the money which now goes into the public-houses into War Loan, we must proceed by the old methods, and put up the price paid for licences, and also increase the taxation on beer and spirits." The brewers, indeed, are here in special peril. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might very well say that in future there should be no distinction made between the character of intoxicants, but that what should be taxed is the per- centage of alcohol in any drink—a result which would of course enormously increase the tax on beer. The present system bribes men, as it were, to take their alcohol in the form of beer rather than in the form of whisky and water. Under scientific taxation, if the percentage of alcohol were the only test and beer paid at the same rate as whisky, the result would be exceedingly unfavourdble to the brewing interest. If under this arrangement the existing tax on spirits were increased, there could be no objection on temperance grounds. No doubt the con- sumers would grumble a little, but not to-any great extent; and while war conditions prevailed we feel sure that it would be possible to get another ten millions a year out of " the trade," even though the extra taxation reduced consumption. The third danger to " the trade " is very possibly the greatest of all, though at present it is hardly regarded as a danger. When the King last April set an example of abstention from intoxicants during the war except under doctor's orders, we were very near having a national movement for an anti-liquor pledge during the war. That still remains a possibility. As the correspondence in our columns has shown, there are plenty of people eager for such a development, and if they could only find a leader or leaders who would organize a campaign throughout the country, we might see a crusade, like the " Catch-my-Pal " crusade of a few years ago, which would spread like wildfire throughout England, Scotland, Wales, and the North of Ireland, and might have a very serious effect upon those trading in intoxicants. Already there are whispers of the formation of a King's League for War Abstainers. In public we shall, we expect, be told that " the trade" are quite content with the present situation, and that the three points we have raised are all " bogies " and of no account. Those who look below the surface, however, know that " the trade " have been much agitated by the revival in these columns of the demand for prohibition during the war. They know, too, that that demand cannot be stifled, And for this reason. The Government cannot give up their crusade in favour of thrift, and the moment the plea for saving for war purposes is pressed those who press it are face to face with the question of abstention during the war. That is a cry which cannot possibly die down or blow over, but must continue with increasing force as long as the war:lasts. No wonder, then, that the more long-sighted of the brewers and distillers are already saying in private that they are only too anxious to be bought out on any terms which are in the least reasonable. In these circumstances surely the right and the sensible thing for " the trade " is to join hands, not with the extreme temperance fanatics in order to prevent prohibition, but rather with those who, like ourselves, realize that it would be unfair not to give reasonable compensation to " the trade," and are fully prepared to give it. Shortly, what " the trade " should do is to take up the scheme which was worked out by Mr. Lloyd George's Committee last spring, and boldly ask the Government to buy them out. The mechanism of purchase would not be difficult to construct. There would of course be no attempt to go to the market and raise a Beer and Spirits Loan in competition with a War Loan. The brewers and the distillers, and such other persons as it was determined ought to receive compensation, would be paid in War Stock bearing a 4i per cent. rate of interest, but such War Stock would not be allowed to be sold till after the war, or, perhaps better still, until a year after peace. Of course it is possible to raise all sorts of objections, many of them per se thoroughly sound, to this pro- posal, but their soundness is not a ground for doing nothing. What we have got to do is to consider whether the alternative, the status quo, is open to less objection. Of course if we are satisfied with the way in which the working classes, and indeed a large proportion of all classes, are spending their money in intoxicants, and slowing down the human machine for war work, then there is nothing more to be said. If we are not satisfied with existing conditions, then, in spite of obstacles and difficulties in the way of prohibition and purchase, we must push on. A wire entanglement is a terrible thing, but you can get through it if you have sufficient courage and determination. You must, however, will that it shall be surmounted, and not be content toy fold your hands and say " I am not equal- to such a task."
Previous page
