LICENSES IN THE KING COUNTRY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 198, 21 August 1900, Page 2

LICENSES IN THE KING COUNTRY.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—As your leader l\as been read with interest by residents in this district, also the reports of the various deputations on, the prohibition question, I have taken the liberty of asking that the following- remarks might appear touching on this question, and prompted from observation after a residence of some 17 years here. . 1. The statement which is now being used as a reason why no licenses should be granted is untrue, and known to be untrue by some of the most prominent members of the prohibition party. I refer to that made by Mr French at Mr Fowlds' reception of gentlemen who composed the deputation, viz., that Sir Robert Stout had pledged the word of the Government that liquor would be kept out of the King Country territory if the natives allowed the railway to''pass through their land; and if the present proposals were carried, that pledge would be broken. Another gentleman,, at the same meeting, is reported to have said- that there were not 30 bona fide settlers in the King Country; that depends on what denotes settlers from this gentleman's point of view. 2. That as it is an undeniable fact that prohibition Is a failure here, as in all other districts where prohibition is supposed to exisf, I would call attention to the fact that in Pirongia, Kihikihi, Te Awamutu, Raglan, or any other frontier township, one-never hears of cases of sly grog-selling. Yet the prohibition party 1 argue that if licenses were granted here that sly grog-selling would still be carried on. 3. That, as this country is not "Maori land in the sense of the word, the area acquired by the Government, particularly from the West Coast embracing' the Pirongia, Kinohaku, Marakopa, Hauturi, Orikioi to Otorohanga, being in excess of that owned by the natives, and on the other side Pukutarata, between Otorobanga and Kihikihi, consequently the Hon. Mr Seddon was quite correct when he informed a deputation a short time ago in Wellington that the entlre**condition of affairs was altered since the prohibition proclamation was granted, and' fresh legislation was necessary to meet present requirements. 4., That, as most of the travelling public do their, journeys on horseback, and rivers and bad roads have to be negotiated, I maintain that good hotels accommodation should be available for man: and horse. . • 5. As it has been stated continually at temperance or prohibition meetings that storekeepers one and all "in the King Country sell liquor in wholesale quantities, I wish to deny most emphatically that such is the case. 6. In conclusiqn, I may say that, after long residence here, I am convinced that, had licenses been granted 12 years ago, the Ngatlmaniapoto would have owned more land and the Government less today. It has been proved at certain times, particularly when Land Courts have been held, that regular grog-selling epidemics have existed. I have been told by intelligent natives that, under existing circumstances, their wives get liquor and come home Intoxicated,, and they consider this would not be the case if licenses existed, as publicans dare not risk their licenses by supplying native women with arink. ~ ' , As most of the agitation against licenses is caused by people who have never been here, I think that residents ought to know what the district requires far better than those who live in Canterbury, Wanganui, Wellington, and even Auckland, Apologising for the length of this, I am, etc., JOHN COX, Otorohansra. August 17.