Review of Retiewa, l/lllOG. 



WHAT THE LAW CAN DO. 



" You cannot make men better by Pajrliament " 

 is the parrot cry which has been shouted into our 

 ears continuously during the last few months. It 

 is the stock phrase of those who are opposed to 

 social reform, and in the recent great battle it has 

 been practically the only argument, if argument it 

 could be called, that has been used by the other side. 

 The repetition of a cry like this would seem to in- 

 dicate an anxiety with regard to social reform, a 

 desire to make men better. It sounds like a protest 

 from men who are anxious to improve conditions, 

 but who believe that the passing of Acts of Parlia- 

 ment is more likely to retard than to hasten the 

 good result. 



But the value of the cry is discounted from the 

 significant fact that the men who employ the term 

 are opponents of good, upholders of some of the 

 worst vices that characterise our country to-day. It 

 will therefore be evident that the cry is not a 

 genuine one, even if the statement were a perfectly 

 true one — you cannot make men better by Act of 

 Parliament. 



It is as well in the beginning of a duel to have 

 the ground clear, so that each party gets a fair 

 chance. Likewise in this argument. So it must be 

 explained that the men who desire to keep other 

 men immoral (this term covers every kind of social 

 vice) are the men who express a doubt as to the 

 wisdom of using Acts cf Parliament to lift man- 

 kind on to a higher plane. 



But the curious position about it all is that not 

 one of the reformers, to my knowledge at anv rate, 

 has laid down as an absolutely unexceptional rule 

 that Acts of Parliament in themselves are going to 

 make men moral. It has nowhere been stated that 

 Acts of Parliament are to be the only engine which 

 will work reform in the individual. But if there is 

 one thing more certain than another it is this, that 

 Acts of Parliament, by assisting to provide different 

 conditions of life, by repression, can help to make 

 men better. With just as much or as little sense as 

 they cry " You cannot make men better by Act of 

 Parliament." the same men might say, " You can't 

 make men live longer by Act of Parliament." But 

 an Act of Parliament may make a town healthy, 

 and add to the length of days of the inhabitants 

 bv providing that the city shall be kept clean and 

 free from disease-producing filth, and in precisely 

 the same way an Act of Parliament can prevent 

 gambling by making it illegal, keep people sober 

 by blotting out the liquor traffic, make people more 

 moral by curbing the social evil — in effect by simply 

 helping to bring about conditions which will tend 

 to the elevation of the community. 



FOR INSTANCE. 



Nearly every great city has its slum. Even the 

 larger of our own cities have them. Evil collects 



in narrow streets and the worst houses, and forms 

 a breeding-ground for vice. A man would be pos- 

 sessed of hopeless bias if he argued that slumdom 

 is a good breeding-ground for virtue. Indeed, its 

 conditions necessarily breed vice. An Act of Par- 

 liament clearing away the slum and doing away 

 with the facilities of slum formation naturally 

 makes sweeter conditions, which will have the effect 

 of improving the breed of human beings bred there. 

 Thus does an Act of Parliament have widespread 

 moral results. 



G.\MBLING MABE EASY. 



As I write, betting facilities exist in Melbourne 

 to such an extent that anvbody and everybody can 

 gamble without any difficulty. Even the child, oi 

 the wayfaring man, though very much of a fool, is 

 not likely to miss the way. Bourke-street between 

 Swanston and Rus.sell streets, on the south side, 

 holds at certain hours of the day a swarm of 

 spielers, thieves and magsmen that are scummed 

 from all parts of the States. The Collingvvood 

 " Tote " and the city betting clubs are doing a busi- 

 ness which savours of the Inferno. Does anyone 

 mean to say that conditions like these are not likely 

 to affect the rising as well as the risen generation, 

 and that the removal of these parasites by the hand 

 of the law would not remove the facilities which 

 make wrong-doing easy ? 



Men and women drink alcohol because in our 

 present economic conditions alcohol is provided for 

 them. The desire for alcohol is not a natural one. 

 If men grew up without the knowledge of it, there 

 would be no craving for it. The appetite is purelv 

 an induced one. Can anyone argue with success 

 that men would not be made better by the removal 

 of temptation and the prevention of the formation 

 of a perverted appetite, which removal could onlv 

 come about by the voice of the people through Act 

 of Parliament? After all said and done, an Act of 

 Parliament simply puts up a fence to keep people 

 off a field where they will work harm either to them- 

 selves or to other people. It is also simply an ex- 

 pression of the growing feeling of the community. 



It may be a mightily poor expression, crudely 

 formed, badly put together, but nevertheless it in- 

 dicates the desire of the majority of the people (or 

 is supposed to do so, altliongh it often fails wi'h 

 us on account of minority rule). 



THE AIMS OP LAW. 



But laws should be framed not s'mnlv in ni.-k.' 

 people better. To say that an Act of Parliament 

 will not make people better is not to give a sufficient 

 reason whv the Act should not be framed. Law has 

 two applications or intentions. One is undoubtedly 

 to make the people better, the other is a simj^Ie 

 matter of protection. For instance, the law against 

 burglarv may remotelv have as one of its aims the 



