Appendix II.

Report on Temperance, Convocation of Canterbury, May, 1893.

(Archdeacon Farrar presented the Report of the Committee on [unclear: Intemperance]

This is a very elaborate report, reviewing the whole subject in great [unclear: detail] Sunday closing is claimed to have diminished temptation in Scotland, Ireland, [unclear: and] Wales, and it is noticed that Sunday closing is also the rule in the Channel [unclear: Island] and the Isle of Man, in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, [unclear: Prime] page 6 Edward Island, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, British Columbia, New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, Tasmania, South and West Australia. Working-class populations are stated to show especial eagerness in the direction of increasing restrictions on the sale of alcohol. The celebrated decision in the House of Lords in "Sharp v. Wakefield" is referred to with favour, and the right of compensation, where a license is taken away, is not distinctly affirmed or denied by the Committee, but the actual legal claim for compensation is held to be untenable. Compensation must be left to the Legislature to do what "may be deemed just, equitable, and possible."

The following reference is made to the proposals with which the name of the Bishop of Chester is closely associated in this country:—" Whatever may be thought of the scheme propounded by the Bishop of Chester for making the State, directly or indirectly, the proprietor and controller of all houses where intoxicating liquors are sold, no one who has given careful observation to the subject can deny the justness of his observation, that 'the evils of the present public-house system paralyse and poison the life of the nation.'"

Attention is drawn to increasing intemperance among women, and it is said to be only the bare truth that "hundreds of English children are sacrificed year by year to the drinking habits of their parents." The National Drink Bill is said to have risen from £105,000,000 in 1865 to £140,866,262 in 1892. The report, inter alia, states: "It has been estimated that the entire revenues of all Christian communities, and of all benevolent institutions, do not exceed £18,000,000 yearly, which is but 12½ per cent. of the amount paid annually by the people of the United Kingdom for the intoxicating drinks which bring upon them evils so great and so continuous."

Common justice requires that the absolute control of the liquor traffic should be in the hands of those who are most deeply and directly affected by it. The people of England have an indefeasible right to diminish or do away with a traffic if they come to the conclusion that it has no legal or moral ground of existence, and in cases when, so far from being demanded by them for the supply of their needs, they consider its abnormal development to be the most fruitful source of the misery and ruin of themselves and their homes. It would be better to place all clubs under legal supervision than to allow the continuance of those which abuse the name, and place temptation in the way of those who are least able to resist them. In Prance, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, and Norway, the drift of legislation has often been to favour the production of strong drink, and reduce or entirely remove restrictions to its sale. In our own colonies no difficulty has been found in supplying restrictive legislation, even to the point of prohibition, in accordance with the will of the people. We hold it impossible to exaggerate the importance of energetic action on the part of the Church of England to stem the tide of demoralisation and ruin caused by the abuse of drink. It is a terrible fact, to our shame and sorrow be it spoken, in almost every quarter of the globe we have partially neutralised the other blessings which our rule confers by causing the decimation, the degradation, and, in some instances, the all but total destruction of uncivilised races. In the language of the late Archbishop Thomson—language capable of proof only too rigid—" We have girdled the world with a zone of drunkenness." It remains for us to glance at the remedies which we would suggest:—

1.

First we would mention the formation of temperance associations.

2.

Next we would speak on the subject of total abstinence. The question of total abstinence is purely one for the decision of the individual conscience. The use of fermented liquors, or the voluntary abstinence from them is left open to Christian liberty, to be settled in accordance with many varying conditions of health, expediency, and example. But while on the one hand we reprobate the condemnation of all use of intoxicants as though such use were sinful—a condemnation which in the face of Scripture is unpermissible and uncharitable—we reprobate page 6 no less distinctly the attempt to brand total abstinence as [unclear: though] were simply due to weak onesidedness, fanatical folly, or [unclear: Maniches] opinions. We would recommend all Christians to avoid in both [unclear: dis-]tions the falsehood of extremes. It is significant that in this view [unclear: the] greatest prelates and theologians of the Roman Church are [unclear: at] with us.

There is one class of the community on which we think that total [unclear: abstina] may, as a rule, be definitely urged—we mean the children of the nation.

We would add the suggestion that the clergy should more frequently [unclear: impre] on their parishioners that drunkenness is a sin, as well as a disease and a curse,

We do, however, strongly recommend the following legislative remedies, [unclear: which] with a few omissions and modifications, are identical with those apprved [unclear: by] your Committee in 1869, namely:—

1.	The closing of public-houses on Sunday, except for the [unclear: accommodation] bonâ-fide travellers.
2.	The earlier closing of public-houses on week-day evenings; and [unclear: espec] on Saturday.
3.	A great reduction in the number of public-houses throughout [unclear: the] kingdom. page 7
4.	The rigid enforcement of the penalties now attached to drunkenness, especially in the case of licensed persons who allow drunkenness to occur on their premises.
5.	The compulsory registration and stringent control of clubs.
6.	The prohibition of all music, dancing, or billiard licenses in conjunction with a license for the sale of intoxicating drinks.
7.	The closing of public-houses on the days of all Parliamentary elections.
8.	The appointment of a distinct class of inspectors of public-houses.
9.	Your Committee, in conclusion, are of opinion that as the ancient and avowed object of licensing the sale of intoxicating liquors is to supply a supposed public want, without detriment to the public welfare, a legal power of restraining the issue or renewal of licenses should be placed in the hands of the persons most deeply interested and affected—namely, the inhabitants themselves—who are entitled to protection from the injurious consequences of the present system. To these suggestions of the Committee we would add two others, namely:—
10.	That no intoxicating liquors should be sold or supplied on licensed premises to young persons under the age of sixteen for consumption by themselves or others.
11.	That all publicans should be, as it was always intended that they should be, licensed victuallers—i.e., that they should be compelled by law to sell provisions as well as drink.
12.	That Government should regulate the system of "tied houses."
13.	That the deleterious adulteration of all kinds of intoxicating drink should be punished with the utmost severity.

Archdeacon Farrar offered no comments in presenting the report of the Committee.