The Wanganui Chronicle " Nulla Dies Sine Linea." WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1919. WHY AMERICA "SIGNED THE PLEDGE."

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXVI, Issue 7564, 7 May 1919, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle " Nulla Dies Sine Linea." WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1919. WHY AMERICA "SIGNED THE PLEDGE."

" When a wholo nation of the size and population of the United States decides that henceforth the manufacture i.nd consumption of alcoholic drink Fhall be entirely prohibited, the rest of the worl.i may well take notice. Why have they done it, and what does it mean ? These are questions answerer, in the article below, and while petusing it the reader will probably ask L'mself whether the other big nations of the world, will follow suit. The great war had something to do with hastening the decision ci: the United States on the question, and in this country we have had restrictions imposed. Consequently it is interesting to speculate whether we shall withdraw these restrictions in regard to liquor,; ot whether we shall follow the example of the United States," With these words the "Penny Pictorial," a wide.'y circulated and influential British publ'cation introduces an interesting article contributed by St. Niha 1 Singh, rpon the subject of "Why America 'Signed the Pledge.' " After reading the cable published some days ago vo the intent that brewing of alcoholic liquors has now ceased throughout the United States there can be little doubt i.hat the movement is a fact and not fiction. Having regard, therefore, io the recent referendum, and also to the ciection which wiil tako place in a fe v months' time, the expressions of Mr St. Nihal Smgh are of considerable interest to the people of New Zealand, although* they were originally intended for the people of the British Isles. The ban placed by the United States of America upon the production, sale, ?.nd importation of alcoholic liquor if all kinds, says Mr Singh, is one of the most startling social developments ol

Russia, towards the beginning of ths war, banished vodka; but she achieved th;.t object by the fiat of the Tsar of all the Russians— by the decree of an* autocrat. About the same time France stopped the consumption of absinthe as a drink. The American action is on a far more comprehensive scale than was that cf f.ither Russia or France, since the people, by an overwhelming majority, have decided that all traffic in alcoholic liquor must cease. Why, it may be f.sked, has this wave of reform swept >o irresistibly from coast to coast, and from the Canadian to the Mexican border? It needs no stretch of the imagination to realise the stubborn opposition that it has met from the liquor trade, which is immensely wealthy, prosperous, and resourceful, and from the customer —especially the moderate crinker, who saw no harm in his glass m beer or wine. Anyone who knows the American psychology finds it easy to understand why the Prohibition movement has taken such a, firm hold cf the American people. He will aot attempt to explain it on a moral basis for no religious revival has recently taken place in America. On the contrary, he will seek a matter-of-fact explanation for this phenomenal social development, !>€caus<! he knows that ihe Americans are a matter- ef-fact people, and that, in the first and last analysis they always subject everything to the acid test of "does it pay?" Americans have-banned alcohol because they feel convinced that the consumption of liquor does not pay—from the point of view of individual and nation-

cur time

::! efficiency. Efficiency is the God thpy worship in the ( States, and nothing .short of the conviction that drink, even in moderate quantities, lowers elhtiency would have impelled them :o take the action that they har.3 taken. For years prohibitionists earned on an agitation against the liquor traffic on purely moral and soci-.il p.rounds. They declared that alcohpl destroyed wealth, broke up homes, and f.red brutality and crime. But th«\» numbered their converts by hundred-!, r.nd not by millions. Their arguments

Lad- noappeal to the employers of labcur and to the man who wielded the political power! But as soon as "t'lio prohibitionists changed their tactics, i nd "began to talk of the effect of drink upon individual efficiency, they at on v> began to capture the imagination • f the people who counted. As soon ;>, they had succeeded in proving to the satisfaction of employers oi: large masses of labour that their contentioa was upheld by science, their light was ?s good as won. It is not difficult io lealis.? how much the changed attitude of the employers towards the drink question helped the movement. The very operative or clerk who jeered the teetotaler for ''riding on the water waggon" and "drinking buttermilk' immediately forgot to make light of ivhe matter when he found that his own boss frowned upon indulgence in intoxicating liquor, no matter how moderate, and became greatly concerned when .he found that he was likely to lose .his job if "the governor" smelled whiskey in his breath, or saw him going in -iv coming out of a saloon —as the public house is called in America —or notice! his hand tremble, or heard him complain of a morning headache. It :s surprising how, during the last quarter «>!' a century, the owners, direc tors, and managers of mammoth mills, workshops, and commercial concerns in ;•!! parts of the United States have become convinced that drink lowers the efficiency of workers, and makes them unreliable. Railway magnates, stsei '.lings and the Napoleons of finance, one and all, have increasingly fallen under the spell of that doctrine. During the many years the writer was #n America he heard, again and again, instances of employees who were dismissed because they would not give • p t'rmk, and of others who failed to get into large works anl offices because they were suspected or being " boozefighters" to use an Americanism. .l|<j ■loticed that Americans who controlled railway employees, electricians, and ethers who used delicate tools, and bank clerks, were particularly relentless in closing their offices and works to persons who drank, no matter how moderately. M# Singh also mentions that while he was in America it was a source of perpetual surprise to him that the owners and managers of works employing large masses of workmen, vho insisted that their employees must refrain from drinking alcoholic liquor oi. pain of instant dismissal, should 1 « able to obtain all the skilled and unskilled labour that they needed, and tven to refuse admission to a large overflow. He would have thought that the men would refuse to permit themselves to be dictated to, and would boycott such factories or at any rate that they would grumble at what must appear to them to be plutocratic highhandedness, unpardonable interference with their inalienable right to "life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness/ which was the first i-nnciplje laid down in the Declaration of American Independence. But, although he came into contact with labourers in ail parts of the United States, he heard very little complaint. On the contrary, io bis surprise, he found that most-wor&-j.'en, and not a few of the labour leaders, realised that the teetotal policy v as as much in the interest of the emf.loyee as to the employer. The reasons that 'ed fcha Southern States ol the Union, mostly agricultural, 1o adopt prohibition were material rather than moral, just as they were in the case of the industrial State*. The Southern States have a larg* negro population. In some cases the colcured people outnumber the whites ly four to one. The wiiite men found, from sad experience, that they must put drink out of the negro's way, otherwise he would get out of hand, and murders and other crimes would follow. The leaders ot the negro community, who were anxious to uplift their race, were even more anxious than the white men to keep the temptation of drink away irom the people. Far-sighted persons of both races therefore expnjused prohibition. r*s

soon as the prohibitionists decided 10 conduct their campaign on the grounds of effiiceney, instead of continuing to carry on merely a moral crusade, they vere able to gather together under one banner many diverse interests, all enthusiastically contributing towards the success of the cause. Industrialists, commercialism, men ot science, theologians, ethidsts, moralists, and sociologists of both races, could work hand hi hand. The momentum gained irom their conjoint effort galvanised the movement, which began over eighty jefrs ago, and, until comparatively leoently, had failed to evoke nationwide interest. County after county ! aimed liquor, until whole States became "dry." Ono after another, State legislatures passed laws to proh'bit the manufacture and sale of vilcoholic liquors. The prohibitionists felt, however, that until brewing and distilling ceased all over the country, and all importation of liquor was "topped, alcoholic beverages would '.o smuggled into "dry" areas, and irregularities would continue. In the old days when a "dry" county -was surrounded by " wet'1 counties, or a "dry ; State bordered upon a "wet" Stats, they were scandalised to see ihe railway trains .steam into "dry" towns and deposit jug upon jug, bottle upon bottle, case upon case, oi wiii'ky an J leer, which men standing on the platform eagerly claimed as their private property, shipped to tbein by firms oiusicle the "dry" area. In ]9• 3an Acs was passed to make jt impossible to flout the law prohibiting liquor. It v.as feared that the Act would be <!*•- chared unconstitutional, but it was d\>- ; dared constitutional in. 1917. Ir: ( ppite of it, however, a good deal vi : trinking wont on surreptitiously, ! whisky being obtained from chemi-.ts f n doctors' prescriptions, and patent j nedicines containing a large percent- j age of alcohol being drunk ir.rtead oi j i -.o^k rails. Tlic prohibitionists, tlier.v : fore, intensified their campaign to have i

liquor barred from all parts of the country. The war feave the movement added impetus. American captains of industry saw how the consumption of drink, had been cut down m various European countries, in order • o increase the output ot war materials, md many of those who had refused n take any interest in the prohibition r..-ovement became its active supporters. During tiie later stages of the struggle, and after the signing of the Armistice, another great factor came into operation that tremendously JieJpccl the cause. Everyone interested mi the preservation of peace and order iralised that the saloon was the place where revolutionary plots were 'hatched. That realisation made many powtrful individuals who sneered at prohibitionists join hands with them io close the "pubs." When, on January 15th, Nebraska, which had an important liquor industry, threw its weignt into the scale, the movement for na-tion-wide prohibition was assured success. Both Houses or the United States Congress formally announced, tho next day, the ratification of the amendment to the United States Constitution, which will automatically prohibit the manufacture, importation, and sale of alcoholic liquors of all sorts in nil parts of the United States.