130 THE ALCOHOL PROBLEM 
and was ultimately rejected by 166 votes to 60. In 
1926 a new *‘ Liquor (Popular Control) Bill,” based on 
the Bishop of Oxford’s Bill, was introduced in the 
House of Lords by the Bishop of Liverpool. Accord- 
ing to this new Bill polls were to be taken in all polling 
areas at intervals of four years, and it was proposed 
that a majority of 55 per cent. of the votes should be 
necessary to carry no-licence. ‘The financial proposals 
were more generous than of old, and proposed to create 
a central compensation fund drawn from annual levies 
on the trade (payable for fifteen years only), from 
proceeds on the sale of redundant properties in re- 
organisation areas, and from the net profits earned 
in these areas. These financial proposals met with 
strenuous opposition from the-trade, and objection 
was raised almost equally to the small majority required 
to carry no-licence. It seems reasonable that for the 
adoption of such a drastic change a two-thirds or even 
a three-fourths majority should be required, though 
a mere majority may be all that is necessary for the 
adoption of reorganisation. A defect of the Bill lay 
in the proviso that if no-licence or reorganisation were 
once adopted, there was to be no possibility of reversing 
the decision at subsequent polls. Another defect was 
the principle of mandatory polls, instead of voluntary 
ones, the result of local demand. The Government 
found itself unable to support the new Bill as they did 
the previous one, and on its second reading in June, 
1927, it was thrown out by a large majority. | 
In spite of the hostility of the trade in general, its 
more enlightened members realise that licensing con- 
ditions cannot be allowed to remain in their present 
state, and they favour a measure of State purchase,