With the second object of Mr. Asquith's Bill we find
our- selves in principle in entire agreement. We have always held that the State has been most foolish, nay, profligate, from the point of view of finance, in the way in which it has created a most lucrative monopoly, and then parted with that monopoly without exacting its proper pecuniary value. We have, there- fore, consistently declared ourselves in favour of a just and reasonable scheme under which the State should regain its power to obtain something like the cash value of the monopoly which it has been in the habit of virtually throwing away. In our opinion, the essential question is whether Mr. Asquith's proposals are fair to the trade, for we recognise that although the State has been foolish it must not be unjust, and that it cannot resume the gift it has made without proper compensa- tion. The State no more than the individual can say :—" I was a fool to have given you that valuable present, and I therefore mean to reclaim it, whether you have still got it in your hands, or whether you have sold it to somebody else." We are inclined to think that Mr. Asquith's proposal of a fourteen years' time-limit is not sufficiently liberal, and that if applied it would do a good deal of practical injustice. What is wanted is such a period that a small annual sum put aside by the license-holders would at compound interest provide a sinking fund. We doubt whether such a sinking fund could be pro- vided under any period of less than twenty years. On this point, however, we should like to see further discussion.
Previous page
