In Committee on Finance. - Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1931—Second Stage (Resumed.) – Dáil Éireann (6th Dáil) – Wednesday, 18 Mar 1931

In Committee on Finance. - Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1931—Second Stage (Resumed.)

Debate resumed on the question—"That the Bill be read a second time."

Mr. Kent

I do not wish to detain the House at any great length. A great deal of valuable time has been spent already in debating this Liquor Bill, which confers no advantage on the publicans or the community at large, especially the people in the rural areas. As the Bill stands at present if a person in the rural areas wishes to moisten "the chosen leaf of bard and chief" he is debarred from doing so unless he travels three or four miles to qualify as a bona fide traveller. To my mind very few farmers or farm labourers can afford to go into publichouses to spend their money, owing to the economic state of the country. Every member of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party who contributed to the debate reminded me of a cobbler sticking to his last. They were trying to patch up a worn old Bill and to pass it over to the publican. Where does this demand come from? It does not come from the licensed trade and certainly not from the public at large. I am not an advocate of temperance by any means or of excessive drinking. I believe in moderation in drinking and other things. A great deal has been said about the intemperate habits of our people in years gone by. I maintain that people who go into public houses and spend a few shillings, spend far more wisely than people who go into cinemas to see pictures which are demoralising the youth of the country. In the case of people who go into public houses some of the money goes back directly or indirectly to the producers of the raw material used in Beamish's porter and Guinness's stout.

I think the Minister for Justice would be very well advised to withdraw this Bill altogether and put it into the waste-paper basket. The publicans of Ringsend would then give it a public funeral. As far as I can see, this Bill is brought in by the Cumann na nGaedheal Party to draw wool over the eyes of the publicans in order to get their support at the next general election.

With regard to the opening of publichouses on St. Patrick's Day, we look upon this as a national question. The people who have gone before us in the Gaelic League advocated the closing of publichouses on St. Patrick's Day. To the credit of publicans, they unanimously agreed to close those houses on St. Patrick's Day in order to celebrate the national festival in a becoming manner. A great deal has been said about people going into publichouses and drinking a few pints of porter or bottles of stout. What about the people in stately mansions and banqueting halls who spend thousands of pounds in costly liqueurs, champagnes and crusted port?

I would like to see some of the drastic regulations in the licensing laws removed. It only requires three endorsements at present to close up a publican. He automatically ceases to exist as a publican when the licence is endorsed three times, with the result that himself, his wife and family will be thrown on the side of the street to swell the ranks of the unemployed. The Minister should bring in a Bill to remove that clause.

Mr. B. O'Connor

I rise to support this Bill, because I think it is only right that reasonable facilities should be given to the people to get refreshments on St. Patrick's Day. This Bill only provides for a three hours' opening on that day.

Mr. MacEntee

The breaking of the ice.

Mr. O'Connor

We have heard Deputies go back to the days of the Gaelic League and refer to this Bill as a retrograde step. I would like to remind these Deputies that in the days when the Gaelic League went out to try and close publichouses on a national holiday the houses were open for sixteen hours, from seven in the morning until eleven in the evening. This Bill only provides for a three hours' opening. That is the reason I support it. The Fianna Fáil Deputies make out that Cumann na nGaedheal are behind this Bill because they will get the financial support of the licensed trade. I would like to tell the Deputies that if Cumann na nGaedheal got the support of the trade it would not be the first time that the trade supported the national cause.

Mr. Daly

Hear, hear.

Mr. MacEntee

I wonder who Deputy Daly voted for in 1918?

Mr. B. O'Connor

One of the Deputies on the front benches of the Fianna Fáil Party quoted a joke that was published, years before he was born, in an English comic paper that always tried to hold the people of this country up to odium and as stage Irishmen. The joke was to the effect that on the evening of St. Patrick's Day men were sick and sore, bemoaning their condition and exclaiming, "Oh, holy St. Patrick, how I am suffering for you!" With all respect to the Deputy who used it, that joke was used against the Irish people years before he was born. It is hardly fair for a Deputy to be quoting English comic papers to try to score points, because he does not like to see the public houses open on St. Patrick's Day. The publicans are not very concerned whether they will be allowed to open on St. Patrick's Day or not. I am not speaking from the point of view of the publicans at all; I am speaking for the overwhelming majority of the people who want certain accommodation, who should have it on the National Holiday, and who, at least, should have three hours for the purpose of obtaining refreshments. I think that is a very reasonable and a very fair proposition, and I would tell the Gaelic League, of which I was a member in the North Dock Ward—the St. Laurence O'Toole branch—that some years ago I canvassed the publicans and asked them to close on St. Patrick's Day.

Mr. MacEntee

Why?

Mr. O'Connor

If the publicans in the old days told us that they would close their houses, except for three hours on St. Patrick's Day, I know that the Gaelic League would have accepted, and would have been delighted at such an offer.

Mr. de Valera

Nonsense.

Mr. O'Connor

Because of the compromise they would have accepted this Bill. Deputies on the Labour Benches attacked Deputies on these benches from a different angle. I will let it go at that. I would like to see an amendment introduced doing away with the split hours in the four cities. The split hours are a great hardship, especially in Limerick and Waterford, where conditions of trading are somewhat different from what they are in Dublin. In Dublin trading is confined almost entirely to the sale of liquor, but it is different in Limerick and Waterford where houses that sell other commodities, besides drink, have to close in the middle of the day at great inconvenience to the public. People who go to these cities to do business find that they are unable to do so in a reasonable time. I think there is a much more growing demand for doing away with the split hours than for opening on three hours on St. Patrick's Day. I would like to remind Deputies that this is not the first time this Bill was before the House. A similar Bill pased through this House but was defeated in the Seanad by one vote. The Bill was introduced following the findings of the Liquor Commission that was set up, and which took all the evidence. In its wisdom that Commission thought it right that publicans should be allowed to open for three hours on St. Patrick's Day. That is the reason this Bill is now before the House. As to the split hours, I think what was in the mind of the Minister when that provision was made law was the hope that it might be helpful in inducing certain long sitters to get out into the fresh air, and perhaps forget to return to the publichouses. Those people are very few, and I think it is hardly fair to the overwhelming majority of sensible people that they should be handicapped, in order to save a few imbeciles from themselves. No matter what legislation we pass we cannot save from themselves the man or woman who wishes to sit in a publichouse all day. I would ask the Minister to accept an amendment to do away with the split hours in the four cities because of the great inconvenience caused to the public. After all we must bear in mind that we are here to legislate for the majority of the people in accordance with their will, as wisely as we can.

Dr. White

I do not hold any brief on behalf of the licensed traders. If anything, my sympathy would be with the man in the street. I for one fail to see why, if any of our people require a drink or two on St. Patrick's Day, they should not have them. After all, what does this Bill propose to do? It proposes to give to the man in the street the same facilities that he possesses on Sundays. We will have Sunday hours of opening on St. Patrick's Day if this Bill passes, and I hope it will be passed. Speaking as a plain Irishman, I object to seeing our people treated as hot-house plants. I for one have a theory that in the days that are gone when the national outlook was very depressing it undoubtedly had a mental affect on the people and, rightly or wrongly, they sought solace in some intoxicating liquor. This is the year 1931, and the people of Saorstát Eireann are beginning to look around them and find, if I may say so, their sea-legs. They are appreciating what sound solid Government means. The national outlook for the people is brighter. The people have more self-respect, and are not taking too much intoxicating liquor. To úse a hackneyed expression, I believe we have turned the corner. I think that the huge majority of the people of this nation realise what the Government have done for them. There is a general uplift and a sense of well-being among our people. I for one believe that if the Bill is passed our people are not going to indulge in an orgy of hard drinking. The habit or custom of drowning the shamrock, as it was called, is passed and I hope passed for ever. Our people are self-respecting now. They feel that they are standing on good solid ground and, just like the people of any other nation, they should be able to take a drink or two without going to excess in celebrating the feast of the National Apostle. The Liquor Commission unanimously, I think, recommended the opening of licensed premises on St. Patrick's Day, and I for one am going to support this Bill, because I believe that our people are sufficiently educated and sufficiently self-respecting to be able to take a drink or two without going to excess on St. Patrick's Day.

Mr. MacEntee

The re-introduction of this Bill to-night, because I think that is what it amounts to, has enabled me, at any rate, to form a higher opinion of the humane instincts of the Minister for Justice. I must say that I was rather disappointed at the way he treated the Bill originally. He produced a baby and left it on the doorstep of Deputy Byrne to die, as we all thought, of exposure. Apparently, to-night he has repented and has taken the child up in his arms, wrapped it in the Governmental garments and presented it again for acceptance to the House. We were wondering what is the reason for the change. I have before me the "Irish Independent" for Wednesday, 18th March, which affords a possible explanation of the matter, because I see there that tomorrow at 3 o'clock p.m. there will be held a national meeting of the licensed, brewing, distilling and kindred interests and I understand that the Minister has come to reclaim his offspring in order that he may receive the congratulations and thanks of the multitude that will be assembled tomorrow at 3 o'clock p.m., with presumably Deputy Daly, Deputy Carey, Deputy J. J. Byrne, and apparently, all the other members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party in attendance.

If there is one thing that must occur to anyone who has listened to the debate on the Bill, it will be the extraordinary unanimity with which, with the possible exception of Deputy Rice and Deputy Daly and Deputy Carey, every member of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party who has spoken in support of the Bill has endeavoured to dissociate himself from the licensed trade. "I hold no brief," said Deputy White, "for the licensed trade.""I am not speaking," said Deputy O'Connor, "on behalf of the licensed trade.""We will have nothing to do with the unclean, with the leper, with the outcast, with the publicans of the Twenty-Six Counties of Ireland, though we are going to support the Bill which has been introduced in this House ostensibly in their interests"— that is the attitude which, Pilate-like, washing their hands of the whole matter, Cumann na nGaedheal Deputies have taken in this House in regard to the Bill. Anxious to proclaim that their hands are clean, that there is no trace of slush money hanging to them, that there will be no "palm oil," that there will be no contribution to Cumann na nGaedheal funds, that this Bill is not, in short, the precursor of a general election, and is not going——

Mr. Daly

It is not worth tuppence.

Mr. MacEntee

I am going to show conclusively before I finish that it is not worth tuppence to the publicans, even though it is going to be a catchpenny measure in order to get their contribution to the Cumann na nGaedheal election chest. In speaking against this Bill I am not speaking as a teetotaller, I am not speaking as a prohibitionist, and I am not speaking as an enemy of the trade, for the very best of good reasons.

Mr. Byrne

Why call them lepers?

Mr. MacEntee

I am no enemy of the trade. I am not going to dissociate myself from it, and if I were speaking on behalf of this measure I would not get up and say pharisaically that I do not hold any brief for the publican. My attitude in regard to the Bill is very much, if you like, the attitude of Deputy Murphy to a certain extent. I would be inclined to say with him, why should not a man have a drink on St. Patrick's Day? That was my first reaction, but when I came to consider the Bill, what did I find? I found an established position, a position which had been identified, if you like, for a considerable number of years with the national position.

When I remember that on the Committee that first inaugurated the movement to have the publichouses closed on St. Patrick's Day was the name of Patrick Pearse and others, who did stand for Irish nationality in this country, and that that movement was identified with the Republican movement and with the Irish Ireland movement, and with every movement that has been significant in the latter history of our country, then I begin to ask myself, in view of the position that had been established and in view of the position that had been accepted by the general mass of the people, what reason or what demand was there for a change. Undoubtedly there was a very strong feeling throughout the country some years ago, and it persists up to the present day, that it would be a fitting thing and right thing that the publichouses should be closed on St. Patrick's Day, just as drapery houses are closed and chemists are closed and grocers' shops are closed. Though I said I am not an enemy to the trade, I cannot see that there is any reason that the trade should be singled out and put in a privileged position in regard to virtually every other trade in the country on St. Patrick's Day. And if you ask me why should not a man be able to buy a drink on St. Patrick's Day, I ask why not buy a collar, why not be able to go into a butcher's shop and buy a pound of steak, if you like? Why should he not buy any one of the thousand and one things that public opinion says he should not buy on that day?

Deputy O'Connor said, and it is the sort of argument used several times over in this debate, that when the original Licensing Bill was before the House there was no demand for closing on St. Patrick's Day, but when the Bill went to the Seanad a section providing for the closing on that day was carried by one vote. But the Bill came back to this House, and if the Seanad had done anything which was not in accordance with the general desire, it was open to this Dáil to have rejected the amendment which was introduced in the Seanad and to have sent the Bill back to the Seanad in its original condition. But what do we find. With a solitary exception of a plaintive wail from Deputy John Daly not one single Deputy, not even Deputy Batt O'Connor nor Deputy Doctor White, nor any present member of this Assembly who was then a member of the Dáil got up to propose that the provision which had been inserted in the Seanad should be rejected? Why? They were too much afraid of the publicans to have done what the public wanted in the first case, but when the thing was done in another place, then they were afraid of public opinion——

Dr. White

On a point of explanation, may I say I was not in the Dáil when the Bill came back from the Seanad?

Mr. MacEntee

Of course, I accept the Deputy's word, but I think that Deputy White was a member for Waterford in the Dáil that sat from 1923 to 1927.

Dr. White

No, I was not.

Mr. MacEntee

I am sorry. I apologise for having made the statement. Why was it when this amendment was inserted in the Seanad that the Dáil did not disagree with it? That august assembly, the Seanad, seems to be held now by members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party in extraordinary disesteem. If it was a member of the Fianna Fáil Party who was to cite as a reason against a legislative proposal that the matter originated in the Seanad, one could understand it. It would be due to our natural bias, to the opposition we naturally feel towards all those who occupy positions of privilege. But when the Cumann na nGaedheal Party, which is responsible, in the first place, for instituting the Seanad, and responsible at the present moment for maintaining the Seanad even though it is a rather expensive body, urge as a reason against any particular legislative provision that the matter was introduced in the Seanad, I begin to think that we are living in an age of topsy-turvydom, that there is some hope for the members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party, and that ultimately we may get them to vote with us in support of a proposal to abolish the Seanad, as everything that emanates from it is now anathema to the Cumann na nGaedheal Party.

But why, when this thing was done in the Seanad, when it came back to the Dáil, was there not a proposal to have it deleted? Because public opinion was in favour of the closing of publichouses on St. Patrick's Day, and because there was a general election looming in the distance, and Cumann na nGaedheal Deputies were afraid of going into the lobbies and voting in favour of opening the public houses by voting to reject the Seanad amendment. That is the real position; and it is because I am perfectly certain that there is a strong public feeling in favour of closing the houses upon St. Patrick's Day that even if my first reactions were in favour of this Bill, on consideration I felt that if we are to give effect to what is after all the main and guiding principle in it, the significant principle which signalises, as Deputy Daly says, that the ice is breaking, we are compelled to oppose this Bill.

Let me say that I am not one of those who feel that if the houses were open we would have a reversion to the scenes of Deputy Daly's boyhood to which he referred with such evident pride. I think there has been a real and significant change in the habits of our people, and it is because there has been such a change that there is no demand for the opening of the houses on St. Patrick's Day. If there has been such a demand, we, at any rate, on these benches, have not heard it. We have had many communications from people who are very strongly opposed to this provision in the Bill. We have had them from the assistants, from members of temperance societies, and I have had them from publicans themselves. The trade even in Dublin is divided as to this opening on St. Patrick's Day. I know that throughout the country the trade generally is opposed to it, because they know if this proposal is carried it would not be to the advantage of the country publicans, and that so far as the country publicans are concerned, it is only going to offer greater inducement to people who want drink, and they are by no means a significant proportion of the adult population of the country.

They are a very insignificant proportion, but such as they are this Bill so far from helping the country publican is going to afford greater inducement for those who desire drink to travel to Dublin. It is going to add to a certain extent, if you like to a minor extent, another attraction to the city on St. Patrick's Day. It is not going at any rate to help the country publican. It is going to make his lot a good deal more uncomfortable than at the present day. If you ask any publican outside the Metropolitan area, he will tell you that he would rather be in a position to close his shop if he could and so be in a position of going off and taking a holiday than to remain at home lest he might offend someone from the neighbouring village three or four miles away who might knock at his door for a drink and find nobody there to serve him. That is the general feeling, I know amongst the country publicans—that they would rather have the day free and be able to take a holiday without being under an obligation to anybody. I do not believe that there is going to be any reversion to the custom of drowning the shamrock. Our people have learned to be true to their innate character. Prosperity has made them temperate—at least the fact that they have now the land under their feet and a certain foothold in their own country has made them temperate. They have learned that they can honour themselves and their country in sobriety and temperance. Thus it comes that there is no real demand for the opening of houses on St. Patrick's Day. It would be libellous to say that we would revert to the scenes in which Deputy Daly participated.

Mr. J.T. Wolfe

I never lost my train at Mallow.

Mr. MacEntee

More shame for you, because if you did not wear the scarlet coat you took the golden guineas for prosecuting many a man who would not wear it.

An Ceann Comhairle

I was stating the fact that we close these shops on that day and, when we do, what justification have we for opening the publichouses on that day and imposing this hardship on the assistants, a hardship from which they are going to have no redress or no relief? If anybody thinks, in the present circumstances, that the assistants have a fair chance of getting any other public holiday as an alternative then they are less familiar with the conditions in the trade than I think them to be.

Again, taking the publicans as a whole, what use is this Bill going to be to them? I am perfectly certain that when they think it over most of them will be sorry that the Bill goes through. They can afford to do without the opening because the net profit which they will derive from the opening on that day will be insignificant. It will not matter a straw to them and yet because they are empowered to open they will have to open. Those of them who have assistants who would like to go away for the holiday will be compelled to stay there on that day. Those of them who have not assistants will have to spend the day behind the bar and will be compelled to keep their children behind the bar on that day. So far as the trade is concerned, I believe that they will ultimately regret the opening of the publichouses on St. Patrick's Day. I know that since compulsory closing on Sunday came into force in the Six Counties a considerable number of publicans are very glad that they can have Sunday to themselves and that they will not offend anybody by having their doors closed or by refusing a customer a drink. You will find, as I said before, that that one section of the community more than any other will regret the opening on St. Patrick's Day.

There has not been a single argument advanced in favour of this Bill. The Bill has been brought in merely for political purposes, in order to prove to the publican that Codlin is his friend and not Short, and as a gesture of goodwill from the President of the Executive Council to the members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party. We are opposing this Bill as a Party. We could have taken the easy way out and said we will leave this Bill to a free vote of the House, for there is no question of national principle involved in it. It would have been easy for us to have taken up that Pilate-like attitude and washed our hands of the whole Bill and thus avoid any opprobrium or ill-will that would have been aroused against the Fianna Fáil Party. If we had done that we would have been abandoning what we believe has come to be a recognised principle in this country that the publichouses should be closed on St. Patrick's Day. We are well aware of the political reactions among the trade which our attitude in regard to this Bill will have. So are Cumann na nGaedheal well aware of it, but the difference between the Fianna Fáil Party and Cumann na nGaedheal in this matter and in all other matters where national principle is concerned, is this, that this Party—the Fianna Fáil Party—is not for sale.

Dr. Hennessy

In this discussion I think a lot of political puritanism has been introduced. The discussion has tended to show how corrupt the Government Party is and how they are in the hands of the publicans. Nevertheless, the Fianna Fáil Party takes great trouble to show the publicans that this Bill means nothing for them and gives them no favours.

They have also plainly told them that if they were in power they would give them something substantial and something to be thankful for. If that is not a bid for the publicans' support, I do not know what is. Deputy de Valera spoke of redundant publichouses, and in so far as the Deputy will ever commit himself to favour or oppose anything, he declares that he would be prepared out of central funds to compensate the publicans for the abolition of those redundant publichouses. That is a big asset for the publicans, and if the publicans support the Government Party after that pronouncement, I will say that they are more patriotic than they are good politicians.

I am a bit of a total abstainer myself, although I could never look the part; I have not the necessary cadaverous and ascetic look, but I do believe that the arguments offered in opposition to the opening of St. Patrick's Day for a few hours are the merest hypocrisy. We have, for any energetic individual, 8,760 potential drinking hours in the year, and it does not matter very much, so far as the national character is concerned, if you add three more hours to that number. There are 3,848 actual drinking hours during which the lord can get drunk and so also can his butler, his cook and his valet. The existing St. Patrick's Day prohibition works out in this way: You are not allowed even for three hours to drink at the bar of a publichouse under supervision and inspection; but if you take the precaution the evening before to bring a few gallons of liquor into your house you can get as drunk as you like.

Recently I was reading of the case of a public board in the South of Ireland. The members went to Mass on St. Patrick's Day. They had left in a very liberal supply of all kinds of drink—whiskey, beer, stout, ale, and even soda water. I am sorry that Deputy Hugo Flinn is absent. If he were here he might be able to throw light on this subject. I do not think that the soda water was exactly for teetotallers. I think it was there to mix with the whiskey. The members of that board enjoyed themselves, and that is another way of celebrating St. Patrick's Day. That happened during the present prohibition. With Deputy Fahy I have a great deal of sympathy. He told us pathetically about his life's work and about all he had done to close the publichouses on St. Patrick's Day. We all know something about the closing of publichouses on that day. We are aware that although the front door might be closed the back door would be very wide open. You could get in by the back door and get as drunk as you like.

Mr. Daly

Why not?

Dr. Hennessy

I would just as soon they got in by the front door and do the thing decently. Then we had Deputy Aiken, the spiritual director of the Fianna Fáil Party. He tells us there is nothing particularly immoral in taking a drink, but he staggered me when I heard him advance an awful slander on the people of New York. He said that he did not see a sober man, woman or child in New York. Mind you, the very child in arms evidently was drunk in New York. I do not know if the Deputy would suggest that one explanation of that was that New York has a very large Irish population. However, he came here to the Dáil to utter what I believe is a slander. I know that there is drink to be had in New York and there are speak-easies, but to say that you could not see any man, woman, or child, sober in New York is simply stretching the thing very far. However, that is a matter for Deputy Aiken. I have seen men possibly as sober as myself, and I have heard of men in drink projecting various acts, but I have never heard the equal yet of the statement made by Deputy Aiken.

We have heard of a place called Ballyhaunis in the County Mayo. A Fianna Fáil Deputy tells us of the condition of affairs in Ballyhaunis. I have never heard anything better than what he described; it almost rivals Deputy Aiken's story. The Deputy who referred to Ballyhaunis said:—

It is sickening to have a proposal of this kind made again after the years during which St. Patrick's Day was honoured as a national holiday. The keeping of St. Patrick's Day as a "dry" holiday injured many parts of the country. In Ballyhaunis the biggest fair and "patron" of the year was held that day. Then all the publichouses were closed on that day. There was no "patron" and the fair was smashed, great injury being done to business and also to the farmers round the town.

That is an astounding statement. I was certainly astounded to hear it. I thought my ears had deceived me, but when I referred to the Parliamentary Debates I found what I had heard confirmed. What the Deputy's statement amounted to was that the people in Mayo, because of the closing on St. Patrick's Day, could not hold their fairs or markets and consequently gave them up. I am not surprised that there is a librarian crux in Mayo. Anybody short of all the virtues of St. Patrick would hardly do as librarian in Mayo—that is, if Ballyhaunis is typical of the whole county. I do not believe that that is so. I believe that this is another case of exaggeration. That is what the Deputy declared happened under prohibition— the people had to give up their fairs and markets and could not transact ordinary business unless to the accompaniment of drink.

I see no reason why St. Patrick's Day should not be kept the same as Sunday. I have not observed any excessive drinking on Sunday and I do not believe that there will be any excessive drinking on St. Patrick's Day. Those people who want a drink and who would be satisfied with a drink should be allowed to have it; there is no reason why they should not get it on St. Patrick's Day just the same as on Sunday.

Another matter has been referred to in connection with this Bill. I refer to the question of split hours. At the time the Bill was going through the Dáil I could not see the advantage of split hours. I do not agree with Deputies who say that split hours have a good effect on the chronic toper who frequents a bar from morning till night. The position of such a man reminds me of a sponge wet to saturation point. That man is sent out of the bar from one hour to dry himself so that he may come back and absorb all the more. For that reason I do not think the split hours achieve any good purpose. In addition, the split hours cause an immense amount of inconvenience to the public.

Of course any discussion here is vitiated by a political atmosphere and cannot be dealt with on the merits. The Opposition, and particularly the Fianna Fáil Party, are prepared to use any argument to show what a sordid lot the Government and their supporters are. That has been the underlying idea in the arguments used in the discussions on this Bill. I think it is time they should be ended. There are many other crusades besides this one that could very well be preached on a St. Patrick's Day. We are very much in need of some such crusades. If they were preached they might do this country a lot of good. It is very regrettable that at the present day our Ministers are in the position of carrying their lives in their hands. I would like to see, say, Deputy de Valera, Deputy Aiken or Deputy Geoghegan preaching a crusade on St. Patrick's Day against the kind of assassination that we have going on.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is getting very far away from the question of split hours on St. Patrick's Day.

Dr. Hennessy

I make that suggestion and believe it is a good one. I am voting for this Bill mainly because it is a Government measure but principally because I believe there is nothing in it that will injure the character of the Irish people. I believe that the poor man, the democrat who is being talked about so much, should be afforded an opportunity of taking a drink at a public bar. He should not be put under the necessity of going out on St. Patrick's Eve, of bringing in a supply of drink to his house, and of consuming it on St. Patrick's Day in his home to the disedification of his wife and family.

Mr. T. Sheehy (West Cork):

I rise to support this Bill. I cannot understand the alarm of Deputy de Valera and his Party, and of prominent teetotallers in Dublin, at the contemplated passing of this Bill, a measure that will enable the present generation of Irishmen to take a drink, if they so wish, on St. Patrick's Day when they go on a visit to their neighbouring towns and villages to witness their national games. Those who have opposed the Bill have expressed the view that our people should not be afforded that opportunity. I trust the Dáil will refuse to endorse that point of view. The freedom that we enjoy was won by the young men of the present generation. They are the guardians of what we have won. Therefore, I hope the idea is not going to be broadcast from this Dáil that the representatives of the people assembled here are of the opinion that the men of this generation are not to be trusted for a few hours on our national festival day. The teetotallers and the members of the Party opposite should realise that throughout the country thousands and thousands of our fellow countrymen are sober and self-respecting and a credit to the Irish nation. They do not come up to Dublin and proclaim from the housetops that they are teetotallers. They do not go along the highways saying: "Look at me, I am a teetotaller." No. They follow the example of the poor publican in the Gospel. I am astonished at the narrow policy that has been enunciated by the Party opposite.

In the constituency that I represent we have a marvellously successful movement, one that aims at cultivating the virtues of sobriety and self-respect amongst our people. Many members of this House are aware that in West Cork three dioceses adjoin. There is the ancient dioceses of Ross. One of its bishops, Dr. O'Herlihy, sat on the Council of Trent. You have also coming in there part of the diocese of Kerry and part of the diocese of Cork. On the Sundays the spiritual leaders of the people appeal to them to cultivate the virtues of sobriety and self-respect, a doctrine that is preached by the Hierarchy and clergy of Ireland from Donegal to Cape Clear. During all the years that I can remember the practice of these virtues and a strict observance of the ten commandments have been preached to the people Sunday after Sunday. Surely the Party opposite do not contend that the preaching and example of the bishops and priests of Ireland have had no weight with their people during all those years? To suggest such a thing is simply ridiculous. It is terrible to think that men should be getting prominence now because they malign and slander their fellow-countrymen about drink.

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

I am not ashamed to proclaim that I have been a publican for 50 years. Thirty years ago the people of Skibbereen started a movement for the observance of St. Patrick's Day as a national holiday, with this proviso, that travellers who came into the town on that day would be entitled to have a drink. In good old Clonakilty, which is also my constituency, all Church holidays are observed with great strictness. I would ask Deputy de Valera, the teetotallers of Dublin, pioneers and others to spend their holidays next summer in my constituency. If they do, I suggest to them that they should visit the cottages of the fishermen and the labourers, the homesteads of the farmers, and the houses of our business people. If they do they will find in each house a picture of the Sacred Heart with a little red lamp burning before it. In view of that, is any man here going to say that our men and boys, our women and girls who leave home on St. Patrick's morning, in which the Sacred Heart is thus honoured, are likely to return in the evening intoxicated? I say they are not. I appeal to Deputies on the other side to be true Irishmen in this matter and to put petty ideas about serving Party aside.

There is nothing to be gained by running down the publicans of this country. I hold that they are a self-respecting body of men. To be sure you may find an odd black sheep amongst them. We ought not to forget, however, that in Heaven some of the angels fell. There may be a few publicans who so far forgot themselves as to sell drink during prohibited hours. The people most severe in condemnation of their conduct are the other well-conducted members of the trade. I appeal to the Dáil not to divide on this question, but to be unanimous in according the privilege to the present generation of taking a drink, if they wish to do so, on St. Patrick's Day. They are the men who accomplished what we are enjoying to-day. Disgusted at the treachery of Lloyd George and other members of the English Government—treachery which was shown in their treatment of honest John Redmond and other brave Irishmen—these young men took the cause of their country in their hands, and we are sitting here this evening because of the heroism they showed. I feel certain that the intelligence and patriotism of the members of this House will prevent them passing a law which would deprive the people of this country from taking a drink on the national holiday.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Deputy MacEntee remarked that there has been a considerable interval since this Bill was last before the House, and stated that it had been our intention to drop it and that suddenly we changed our mind. We never had any such intention. It never was in our mind that this Bill should be dropped, but it could not possibly have been anticipated that this, a minor measure, which professes to be nothing else except a minor measure for the alteration of the present licensing law, should be debated at such inordinate length as this measure has been debated. It never occurred to us either, and I do not think that it could have occurred to anybody, that so many absolutely irrelevant speeches could be delivered upon any Bill as have been delivered upon this one. We have been asked why the Bill was introduced. All sorts of strange motives have been attributed to us for introducing this Bill. It was introduced because it follows the findings of the Liquor Commission.

It has been said that we were driven into bringing this Bill in by pressure brought upon us by the licensed trade, that they have dictated it. If they had dictated it they would have to have dictated it to the members of the Liquor Commission, and anybody who knows the persons who constituted that Commission must know that dictation of that kind would be absolutely impossible. This is simple measure honestly brought in for the honest purpose of carrying out the recommendations of the Tribunal which we set up to inquire into this matter.

Mr. Allen

We have heard a good deal about this being a great national question. I, personally, cannot see that persons who declare that it is a great national question have made the slightest case. They talked, Deputy MacEntee especially, about what took place many years ago when the Gaelic League made efforts to close all publichouses on St. Patrick's Day. That has already, I think, been answered by Deputy O'Connell, who said—and the argument appears to me to be conclusive— that there was not at that time any question between limited hours and unlimited hours. The question was simply as to whether there should be complete closing on St. Patrick's Day or complete opening. Deputy MacEntee admitted that there was really no logic in the case made against the proposal, but for historical reasons, because it was a sentimental question, because of its history, he was going to vote against it. It is a completely wrong line to take up. What we must consider is whether for the present needs of the country it is advisable, and we ought to decide our present-day problems accordingly. Doing that, I submit we can say nothing else but that this is a right which the people have to reasonable refreshment on St. Patrick's Day as on other days, and that that right should not be taken away from them. The other matters with which the Bill deals are very small matters indeed—the alteration in regard to transfer of licence from house to house and similar matters of that nature. They have not been attacked, so there is no necessity for me to defend them. I submit to this House that, though these are minor alterations, they make for better administration of the licensing laws. They will not lead to abuse and, in consequence, should receive the approbation of this House.

Question put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 62; Níl, 51.

Tá

Aird, William P.
Beckett, James Walter.
Bennett, George Cecil.
Blythe, Ernest.
Bourke, Séamus A.
Brodrick, Seán.
Byrne, John Joseph.
Carey, Edmund.
Clancy, Patrick.
Cole, John James.
Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
Conlon, Martin.
Connolly, Michael P.
Cosgrave, William T.
Crowley, James.
Daly, John.
Davis, Michael.
Doherty, Eugene.
Dolan, James N.
Doyle, Peadar Seán.
Duggan, Edmund John.
Dwyer, James.
Nolan, John Thomas.
O'Connell, Richard.
O'Connor, Bartholomew.
O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
O'Higgins, Thomas.
O'Leary, Daniel.
O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
O'Reilly, John J.
Reynolds, Patrick.
Egan, Barry M.
Finlay, Thomas A.
Fitzgerald, Desmond.
Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
Gorey, Denis J.
Hassett, John J.
Heffernan, Michael R.
Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
Hennessy, Thomas.
Henry, Mark.
Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
Holohan, Richard.
Keogh, Myles.
Law, Hugh Alexander.
Lynch, Finian.
Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
McDonogh, Martin.
McFadden, Michael Og.
Mongan, Joseph W.
Mullins, Thomas.
Murphy, James E.
Nally, Martin Michael.
Rice, Vincent.
Roddy, Martin.
Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
Thrift, William Edward.
Tierney, Michael.
White, John.
White, Vincent Joseph.
Wolfe, George.
Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Níl

Aiken, Frank.
Allen, Denis.
Blaney, Neal.
Boland, Gerald.
Boland, Patrick.
Bourke, Daniel.
Brady, Seán.
Briscoe, Robert.
Broderick, Henry.
Buckley, Daniel.
Carney, Frank.
Carty, Frank.
Cassidy, Archie J.
Clery, Michael.
Colbert, James.
Colohan, Hugh.
Corish, Richard.
Corry, Martin John.
Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
Crowley, Tadhg.
Davin, William.
Derrig, Thomas.
De Valera, Eamon.
Everett, James.
Fahy, Frank.
Fogarty, Andrew.
Geoghegan, James.
Good, John.
Gorry, Patrick J.
Goulding, John.
Haslett, Alexander.
Hayes, Seán.
Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
Houlihan, Patrick.
Jordan, Stephen.
Kent, William R.
Killilea, Mark.
Lemass, Seán F.
Little, Patrick John.
Maguire, Ben.
MacEntee, Seán.
Moore, Séamus.
Morrissey, Daniel.
O'Connell, Thomas J.
O'Reilly, Thomas.
Ryan, James.
Sexton, Martin.
Smith, Patrick.
Tubridy, John.
Walsh, Richard.
Ward, Francis C.

Tellers: Tá; Deputies Duggan and Doyle. Níl; Deputies Boland and Allen.

Question declared carried.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 18 Mar 1931