CORRESPONDENCE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 78, 2 April 1900, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

FAILURE OF PROHTETTION". !

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—Tn reply to Mr R. French's letter of Thursday's issue, and other remarks of a similar character that have been made recently in' reference to the stand I take oil the question of prohibition, -will you kindly allow me to intrude on your valuable space in self-defence and for. the public: good. .1. Temperance I advocate, always have done. 1 think 1 can make out a, good case for it, religiously, scientifically, and philosophically. I yield to no one in my respect for and adherence to temperance. 2. Temperance and prohibition, although not ' logical opposites or strictly antithetical terms, are in point of fact really and essentially different. Temperance is an appeal to the man, prohibition to the law; the one has the element of love, the other force; the one is a virtue, the other is an involuntary and forced respect. .'i. Temperance has never failed, and I believe never will. Prohibition has failed, and until it is preceded by temperance, based upon a conscientous and an enlightened judgment, it will always fail. 4. Temperance appeals to the best side of the best and worst of- men, prohibition is an appeal to the worst, and is repulsive to the sensitive, cultured, and law-abiding citizen.

5. Prohibition by law to be effective must have a strong tempera nee sentiment to sustain it; a three-fifths majority, and even a still greater proportion, ought to be strictly, honourably, and persistently demanded by the democracy in order to make the great social reform it aims at effective and permanent. G. Hence prohibition by the ' will of the people is perfectly fair; prohibition against the will of the people is unfair. Prohibition, in tile, King- Country at least, is against the will of the people: Therefore, prohibition in .the •■ King Country is unfair. Anyone is at liberty to examine this categorical syllogism and point out the fallacy, if there is one. Prohibition by the will of the people is temperance applied legislatively, prohibition otherwise is an arbitrary-inter-ference with, the liberty of the subject, and must certainly prove an. incubus to the body civic and politic.

7. 1 once believed that prohibition in the King Country was a. success; that position was held on unreliable, insufficient and indirect information. After visiting the district and ascertaining facts for myself, ranging' over a considerable time, I came to a different conclusion from what: I once held. 1 was sincere then., and am now, /although some 'prohibitionists are sceptical on it.

8. J am no lover of the licensing system, but as a choice between licenses and the present state of affairs in the King Country 1 much prefer licenses; but I much more prefer the trying- of a system of State control as an experiment. Let the Government take over a house, .at Otorohanga, Te Kuiti, Poro-a-tarao, Terau-n-Moa, Hantarn, and the chief centi-es, eliminate the. element of private interest, put a man in each house, at a regular wage, irrespective of sales and profits, and make it strictly clear, by distinct regulation, that for drunkenness, caused by the servant of the State, there would be instant dismissal.

9. But before auy experiment is tried, let the people of the KingCountry have the same rights at the ballot-box as others have; place the three systems before them:—(l) the licensing system, (2) State control, (?)) prohibition. Adopt the system decided upon by a, 3-sths majority of the votes of the people; if the people decide upon the third, then apply all the clauses of the Licensing Act of 1893, which prevent the importation, sale and manufacture of liquor in the country. These, briefly, are my views, and I am prepared to uphold them; and hereby challenge Mr French to a public debate on this subject, before any audience, in any hall in the city and at any time.—l am, etc., JOHN lIOSKING. ; Free Methodist Parsonage, Mt. Eden, 2/4/1900. ' j- ::^j

We challenge any consumer of our pasteurised milk to i)rove by analysis that any cream has been extracted from the milk when supplied by us.— Ambury, English and Co.—(Ad.) "We called up Esop at the seance last night." "What did he tell you?" "He said he was mad all over because he didn't think to write his fables in, slang1." , . ' J _ M j_ i^j