Election day boozing

At the start of the 20th century there was a flurry of licensing legislation. Mostly concerned with limiting the hours pubs could open, unsurprisingly. Things like Sunday closing for England. Not all of it passed into law, thankfully. Temperance twats happily seized any chance to rob the working man of his beer.

Another unsuccessful bit of legislation would have closed pubs during parliamentary elections. Something which I know does occur in some countries. Columbia, for example. I got caught out by this a couple of years ago when in Cartagena with Mikey. Where it encompassed not just pubs, but offies, too. Luckily, it wasn't particularly strictly enforced. And I had a litre of duty free.

The measure introduced by Mr. C. Roberts to close licensed houses on Parliamentary election days passed its second reading by a majority of the size that is to be expected from the present constitution of the House of Commons. The Government, of course, were bound to support the Bill because it is practically a redrafted clause of their own measure of last year, but Mr. Herbert Samuel had to admit that "he did not consider that the evil of drunkenness at elections was a grave evil,” and that “he did not pretend that the Bill dealt with a really widespread and serious abuse which gravely affected the electoral system.” Moreover, Mr. Charles Roberts was unable to adduce a tittle of evidence that the closing of public-houses on election days was demanded either by excessive drinking on such occasions or by electoral corruption through their medium. On the other hand the restriction would cause much unnecessary annoyance and inconvenience both to the trade and the public, and like all such coercive measures, would more than probably actually tend to increase intemperance, for the proposal is to open the houses after the close of the p»U (when the inducement to' indulge would perhaps stronger than at any other period of the day) while railway refreshment rooms are exempted altogether! It was not denied by the promoters that the days of excessive indulgence during elections are happily past; nevertheless, when faced with the microscopical number of instances of drunkenness that actually occurred during the memorable Peckham by-election Mr. Roberts attempted to throw discredit on the value of authenticated police statistics. Not a shadow of a case, in short, was made out for the Bill, but because it would put another harassing restriction on the trade, the Government supporters were instructed to vote for it. Should it ever reach the House of Lords, however, we confidently look to that assembly to place its emphatic veto on a measure that would create considerable inconvenience and benefit no one. Moreover, it is becoming increasingly necessary that the Licensing-Bill-by-instalments campaign which is being so zealously conducted by certain teetotal faddists in the Lower House should be resolutely and effectually checked.

The Brewers' Journal vol. 45 1909, April 15th 1909, pages 196 - 197.

Thank satan for the House of Lords, eh. Ironic that an unelected house should get involved in legislation concerning elections.