MONOPOLISTS AND MORALISTS.

THE student of human nature cannot fail to have been observant of the movements of parties, political and commercial, upon the commercial treaty and its adjunct—the Budget. The activity dis- played by the trades, the earnestness with which they have ad- vanced their claims to some consideration, and the general fair- ness with which they have urged their views are as creditable to the "interests" as they are satisfactory to the community at large.

But there are two exceptions to this rule, and, curiously enough, they come from two sections of the public so diametrically anta- gonistic to each other as to excite remark. The proposed exten- sion of the wine and beer licences to eating-houses, roused the ire of the brewers and publicans, who came forward with one of the old exploded fallacies of protection.

One of the commonest fallacies prevalent in the least educated sections of commercial society, is a belief in the lasting value of investments. But nothing is so certain as this, that, if we pur- chase, we do so in the hope that the property will improve in value, and its improved value we realize and pocket as our own private property. If the publican who a few months ago gave 10,000/. for his public-house, conveniently seated near a manu- factory, were to be offered 15,000/. as compensation for giving up his lease, in order that the house might be destroyed and the site used for the erection of another manufactory or a railway, he would consider himslf justified in selling, without bestow- ing a thought upon the convenience of the workmen engaged in the already existing manufactories. And we are not putting an imaginary case, for such things have happened. Had there been a certainty that licences would never be multiplied, and that the factories for ever obeying some immutable law, would never be re- moved

factories, their present sites, not 10,000/. but probably double

the amount would have been required for the purchase. It was the element of uncertainty which fixed the price at 10,0001., and probably the vendor would not have accepted that sum, if he had known that new beverages, hitherto impossible for workmen to obtain, were about to be introduced at prices within their reach. For the publican to some extent is rendered independent of his brewer by the new arrangements ; a point not to be lost sight of, and best understood by those interested, who alone understand the tyranny practically exercised, at present, by the course of trade and monetary arrangements between the brewer and vic- tualler. A vast monopoly is about to be broken up, not sud- denly, but gradually, and in the fair course of business; such a change as every other trade has had to complain of, but which

when the transitional changes have been matured, only developed new sources of enterprise and profit. Every purchase we snake is made subject to " the greatest good of the greatest number." This goes to the extinction of monopo- lies. A monopoly may have been very honestly accumulated. For the primary intention of the Legislature in creating public- houses was, not to erect a monopoly, so much as to obtain hostages of good conduct from the victuallers, and the surveillance of the police over them and their customers. But the restriction has ope- rated in the increased value of the houses with licences annexed.

And with value has come an "interest" for its protection. With

"the interest" we have an exclusive principle of selfish action, which has only to be carried out in all trades to make England a collec- tion of "interests" fighting for very existence, and destructive of all patriotic feeling. Every argument which goes in favour of the monopoly of the publican applies with equal, if not greater, force to English workmen. If we are about to admit French hats which can be sold cheaper, we shall be told we throw out of em- ployment numbers of industrious workmen. Granted. But we do not think so meanly of the mechanical industry and talent of

our fellow countrymen, as to suppose them incapable of turning their abilitit s to another handicraft. And while they find that

new development of their industry, we shall command the imme- diate services of thousands of our present ill-paid, unskilled la- bourers in hewing coal, for a payment far exceeding their highest hopes. Brewers, publicans, hatters, and labourers are all meeting a new point in commercial and. labouring existence; the only certainty of which is, that larger numbers will be employed in

production, and capital, diminished in value in transition' will be offered new sources of profit, perhaps, greater in amount, to make up speedily its original value, and arrived at that point, again re- produce itself faster than it promised before.

Were we not socially a compound of contradictions, we should not be able to understand how the very respectable persons who hold abstinence from strong drinks as a principle of morals, are to be found in sympathetic action with brewers and publicans; the objects of their special dislike hitherto. We wish to speak with

the greatest respect of individuals who both by example precept, and active effort endeavour to reclaim the drunkard. Any repre- sentation of theirs requires a candid consideration even from those who differ from them as to the mode of operations they vehe- mently pursue.

The representation of these abstainers is that the multiplication of public-houses, by the extension of licences to eating-houses, will be productive of an increase of, what they believe to be, the natural effects of "strong drinks ; " crime, pauperism, disease, and. poverty. We are not now going to argue, whether these effects are correctly reasoned from one cause, or whether the love and practice of drinking itself are not effects producible by more remote causes which escape the animadversion of moralists. We are content to assume that the evils mentioned do fructify in the public-house. The number of habitual drinkers is limited. They die at the rate of some 60,000 per annum, but their ranks are re- cruited by "moderate drinkers," who are drawn to the tap-room at first only incidentally, but gradually the love of association so common to mankind makes habitual that which was at first only casual. But how come moderate drinkers there at first? Simply because if they, a mile from home, wish to refresh themselves with a glass of wine, they are compelled to resort to "the par- lour." But if that very large class of persons, who by force of circumstances are compelled to dine from home daily, are to be compelled to indulge their thirst only at the house of a monopo- list, the chances are in favour of their intoxication.

We believe, then the opposition to the new licences to be merely a selfish reproduction of an old and time-worn fallacy of protection and that it must now be prepared to follow the path of Agriculture and Shipping. On the other hand, the efforts of moralists, not intentionally but practically, assisting the mono- polists, is one of the most suspicious alliances ever yet seen in political action. It offers sad evidence as to the extent to which men can bemisled by their sympathies with the ends of moral effort, and yet permit their own means to defeat them. We are only in the path of right and .justice when, in addition to wishes for a distant future, we are also doing strictjustice in the present. We have now a precious opportunity of establishing a distinction in the habits of our fellow men, between drinkers and drunkards ; and we trust it is not to be lost. The moderate drinker stands in danger of becoming a tippler by associating with tipplers. But let such persons be accommodated with their beverage upon their dinner-table, then the publicans will only be visited by drinkers, whilst the restaurant will be employed by those to whom a glass of wine or ale is only a simple accompaniment to dinner. Thus the two classes of drinkers will be separated, and the dangers of association be avoided.

This view of the matter would not be complete did we not no- tice a very favourite fallacy of the abstainer. He will have it that drunkenness has been increased by the Excise licence to beer-houses. So many men confuse the discovery of an evil with its origin, that we can excuse a very natural error. Very fearful details can be produced as to the immorality of beer-houses. But it is some satisfaction to know that they are under the juris- diction of the police who would not have the right to enter unlicensed houses. police, people seem to think if an evil can be huddled out of sight, it is as good as extinguished. We prefer to have our drunkards known, and it is still more important to know them, if they combine.