SWEDEN AND ITS LICENSING SYSTEM.
It was not our object, in entering upon this inquiry, to deal with the
drinking habits of every nation, nor even of every race of mankind, but
rather to select those countries and peoples whose history presented
features of special interest bearing upon our subject. Thus we
considered, in some detail, the customs of those ancient races in which
the subsequent drinking habits of the world appear to have originated.
We dwelt upon the social life of ancient Rome, an empire whose fall was
attributable mainly to the effeminacy, self-indulgence, and tyranny of
its patrician element, and the abject servility and ignorance of its
plebeian population. We have somewhat carefully noticed the changes in
the social history of Germany, a country in which a system of national
education, the love of music, and the use of innocuous beverages have
all tended to convert a whole people from intemperance to sobriety; and
we have devoted considerable space to the consideration of the drinking
life, if we may so call it, of our own country. There are two other
existing nations whose condition at the present time calls for special
notice—the Swedes and the people of the United States of America.
During the first half of the present century, the Swedes are considered
by some persons to have been the most drunken people on the face of
the earth;[311] and one well-known historian says that about the year
1828 the amount of crime over all Sweden was equal to that of the
most depraved cities in Great Britain, whilst the illegitimate births
in Stockholm were “one in two and three-tenths, exceeding even the
proportion of Paris itself.”[312] This state of things the author in
question attributed to the destructive passion for ardent spirits. Other
writers have regarded the accounts of drunkenness in Sweden as somewhat
exaggerated,[313] but all are agreed that the production and consumption
of spirituous liquors were out of all proportion to the number of its
inhabitants, and that the upper classes especially were most intemperate.
We may state at once that the worst accounts of Swedish intemperance in
former times have been based upon certain statistics which need further
elucidation, for at present they appear to be erroneous, but of that the
reader will presently judge for himself. Gustavus III.[314] attempted
to make the distillation of spirits a royal monopoly, but this created
such a dissatisfaction that a modification was soon made in the law, and
every little landowner who was prepared to pay a small fee for a license
was allowed to distil spirits. This system continued to expand until at
length nearly every one in Sweden who felt disposed to turn distiller
was enabled to do so. Every burgher in the towns, we are told, had the
right to retail spirits. “The effect was fearful national drunkenness
beyond the excess of all other nations, and the whole country may have
been said to have been deluged with spirits.” But now let us descend to
details. Alison says that at the time of his writing there were “no less
than 150,000 manufactories of liquid hell-fire, as they have been well
denominated, which distil annually thirty millions of gallons of spirits
for the consumption of three millions of people.”[315] This estimate,
the reader will remark, gives an annual consumption of ten gallons per
head of the whole population. Mr. Carnegie, who resided in Sweden from
1830 to 1845, says in his evidence before the Lords’ Committee, that in
the former year “the number of stills amounted to 173,000, producing, as
well as can be calculated, a quantity equal to ten gallons per head of
the population.”[316] Morewood treats the matter differently.[317] He
speaks of the extent of dram-drinking which prevailed in Sweden in 1830.
The population, he says, was 2,904,538, of whom half may be considered
consumers of brandy. These may be divided into three classes, according
to the number of drams taken daily:—
Canns.
Half-a-million take 5 drams daily or 60 canns yearly, 30,000,000
” 3 ” 36 ” 18,000,000
” 2 ” 24 ” 12,000,000[318]
So far we have extracted verbatim. On the following page of his work the
author tells us that 100 canns are equal to 69½ English wine gallons,
and that the cann is computed to hold 30 drams. From this it would appear
that, in round numbers, 3,000,000 people consumed, in 1830, 60,000,000
canns, or 41,700,000 gallons of spirits, being nearly 14 gallons per
head of the population. But on the same page on which Morewood gives us
this rough estimate, there is what appears to be an accurate “return of
the number of pans (stills) employed, with the amount of canns of brandy
manufactured in Sweden during the years specified.”[319] Those years
are from 1825 to 1829, and the number of pans or stills agrees pretty
well with Mr. Carnegie’s statement, fluctuating from 162,733 in 1827 to
173,126 in 1830, the year named by him. But the total quantity of spirits
produced in the whole of the five years is set down as 17,623,837 canns,
or considerably less than one-third of what the three writers estimate
to have been the consumption in the year 1830 alone, in which the total
production was 3,542,956 canns. (The imports appear on the same page,
and are not worth considering.) This quantity is still enormous, for
the reader will find, on reducing it to gallons, that a population of
2,904,538 consumed, in the year 1830, 2,462,264 gallons of spirits,
whilst in England in the same year nearly 14,000,000 of people consumed
7,732,101 gallons.[320] Whence the writers in question have obtained
their statistics we are unable to say, but, in justice to a brave and
intelligent race of men, it is only fair to point out what appears to
be a grave error affecting the character of a whole nation, and to
give an opportunity for its rectification or explanation. In addition
to spirits, the Swedes drank, at the time mentioned (and continue to
consume), almost every kind of wine and a light palatable beer; and in
consequence of the excessive drunkenness which prevailed, great efforts
were made to promote reform. A temperance society was started in 1835 in
Sweden, which Morewood tells us[321] had succeeded, in 1838, in reducing
the number of stills to about 150,000 (the number named by Alison), and
at length, in the year 1853, a bill was introduced into the Diet which
effected a complete reform in the licensing system of Sweden, and which
has wrought wonders in the habits of the people. The distinctive feature
of the system is, now, that licenses are sold by auction, for a term not
exceeding three years, to persons who undertake to pay certain duties
annually to the local authorities; “or if a company is formed for taking
the whole number of public-house licenses, the town authorities may
contract with such company for three years without an auction, subject to
the confirmation of the provincial governor.”[322]
It is upon this part of the law that the Gothenburg “Bolag,” or company,
was started, which consists of a number of gentlemen whose sole object
is to diminish intemperance, and who pay over the profits on the sale
of drink to the town and provincial treasuries in reduction of the
rates. With the exception of half a dozen licenses which the town
authorities have retained in their own hands, the whole licensing system
is centred in the “Bolag,” which even sublets to the clubs and hotels.
The author visited the drinking houses of various classes last year, and
investigated the system carefully. It is a success so far as Sweden is
concerned, and should certainly be tried in some town in England. The
houses are strictly regulated and managed. The manager has the greatest
interest in maintaining order and propriety. Solid food is supplied
with drink, but that is in many cases a mere form; and everything is
done to diminish as far as possible the evils attending the sale of
intoxicating drink, even the lowest houses being far superior to similar
places in England. The system was about to be introduced into Stockholm,
and is likely to spread throughout the country. But the fact is that a
Permissive Bill is also in operation throughout Sweden. The law as it
stands does not fix the minimum number of public-houses, and in many
places the local authorities, with the sanction of the governor, have
prohibited the trade altogether.[323]
There is some difference of opinion as to the success of the Swedish
system, but it is easily explained. There is certainly still a good
deal of intemperance in Gothenburg, but it arises mainly from the
fact that the country people are unable to obtain liquor in their own
neighbourhood, and therefore they take every opportunity of visiting the
town, where they can procure it without difficulty, and the result is
that, at certain times, there is a considerable increase of drunkenness
visible in Gothenburg.[324] That the legislation has been successful,
however, arises from the fact that it is popular, and meets with the
support of the inhabitants; for during his sojourn in the country the
author never heard a single complaint against its adoption. As regards
the middle classes, however, the author formed the impression that they
still indulge very freely in drink.
There is a custom in Sweden and other northern countries of taking a
kind of preliminary meal immediately before dinner. On a sideboard
numerous cold dishes are set out of sardines, ham, tongue, sausages, &c.,
and invariably two or three decanters of raw spirit, from which each
guest takes a “schnapps” or “dram.” If an Englishman indulged in these
so-called appetisers, as the Swedes are in the habit of doing, he would
spoil his dinner, and they are quite astonished to hear the preliminary
dram spoken of as provocative, not of appetite, but of intemperance.
Then, again, the author saw people in Stockholm, in the middle of summer,
in warm weather, drinking hot grog around the cafés listening to the
music, a practice which he has never witnessed in any other European
capital; and wine appears to be very largely consumed both by gentlemen
and ladies.
Two principles are, however, in operation in Sweden which cannot fail
to prove effectual in diminishing intemperance. One is, that the people
are satisfied of the necessity of adopting legislative measures for
discontinuing the drink traffic; and the other that, as in Gothenburg,
for example, the profits of the sale, are applied to diminish the burdens
of the ratepayers. In other words, the trade is being made unpopular
and unremunerative, neither of which, unfortunately, is yet the case in
England.[325]