HOTEL BARS ANT) THE HALFHOLIDAY.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 197, 19 August 1913, Page 7

HOTEL BARS ANT) THE HALFHOLIDAY.

(To Uie Editor.) Sir.—The letter "apparently written" by Mr. J. S. Palmer, ex-president of tbe L.V.A.. is characteristic of his breadth of view. Will Mr. Palmer be good enough to deal with theee two statements, for which lie has special.qualifications, which, from bie •'eomm-una! standpoint," he designates ""twaddle' , —

'"In Bngland they do not permit young children to be taken into a drinking bar; here we do. In Queensland they forbid women being supplied with liquor; here we permit special facilities'? It is not necessary for a man to have '"practk-al knowledge- the result of years of direct experience" .behind a liquor bar, to know the evil results of the liquor tralD<-; everybody knows. That form of ''practical knowledge" moves some to action to abolish the cause: othem feel overwhelmed with tbe difficulties, und t<uy: "You can't stop it": others don't want to. I'nlike the "so-called" reforms the Trade now und again, by reason of the stress of public opinion, promise to carry out end fail, the public meeting held in St. •James' Hail waa a public- meeting, held in a public hall, advertised in thp public I*retis, addre»i«ieil by public men. open to and attended by the public. Why the implied sneer, "eo-callod public meeting"? Is it because ihe resolutions passed did not meet with Mr. Palmer's approval? Mr. Pahner is heartily welcome to all the comfort he can get from the "soirjiled" growth of the continuance or I license vote. The facte are that at the I ISiHi poll the continuance vote ivae -tUJUS in excels of the nolicenee votr, and in 1811, 3432 in the minority on the prohibition iaeuc, shnwinj; a V 3'" of U.->.SJO voles. As A!r. Palmer knows, although oar objective was, and is. national prohibition, ;.be 1911 po.'l was the iirst taken on that issue. It is quite poesrble that Mr. Palmer will hare more comfort .-itill next year, as in all probability, the national 'vote will be the popular proposal. Hut for the trade's uniform hostility to democratic method*, shown by opposing the question beinjr submitted to the people at the ballot box, by opposing women's enfranchisement, by opposing the democratic majority. the liquor traffic aptly termed by one of ~,,r New Zealand •Judges, "a cancer in the body politic," would have been cut out years since. How dense Mr. Palmer must think we arc. who propose to c]« P hotels! \\licn freed from the unpleasant anil hi.rcni! influences of alcohol, they will j the better fill their needful place "in the I community.—l am. etc., R- FRENCH. (To the Edltoiv-Sby-I am glad Mr. P a :mcr is again to the fore in defence uf the liquor traffic and its privileges, ;va he affords splendid opportunity to further expose the fallacy of granting State sanction for the sale, of a .-omnrKKlHy which is followed by such disastrous results as those recorded week by week in your column-. Jn last Ti.esdavs --Star" we had particulars of four divorce cases, and three were traceable to drink. We]] may the jadSe: say that were it not for the drink the Divorce Court might almost close its doors, and the same applies to other 1 courts. 1 wisji to congratulate Mr. Palmer upon his confession that if the -bars -ire closed one half-day per week w<- would have an intermittent aspect of local nolicense. Some time ago 1 claimed .that, we had no-license one day in seven (Sunday), but, Mr. P. demurred. Now liv ainrms my contention. So far. so good. But he wiehes to know if rherc is a»v other business where one part is closed ajid another part open. We cannot makany comparison of the drink busmes-i with any other,, bin. 1 wouid remind Mr. Palmer that the liquor bar is closed (or supposed to hf-.l on the Sunday, while the hotr?l remain? open; thereby we have an intermittent aspect of nationaJ prohibition of the bar trade 32 hours per week, and most people agree that this is beneficial. Mr. Palmer very adroitly refers to the decreased majority of the no-lice.nse vote at the biAt poll, but I fail to see what consolation he and hie friends can gather from that Methinks a prisoner at the legal bar wouid scarcely thank bis jndge if, after giving Mm a lenient sentence, he called tim back and condemned him to death. That is what happened to the Trade at the last poll. In 1908 221,471 voters (a majority of 33,331) decided that the bar must go. At the nert poll 259,943 (a majority of 54,282) decreed the annihilation of the wboie business, and nothing but tbe undemocratic threefiii/hs clause gave the Trade a reprieve. When the vote of the respectable no ; license citizen is of equal value to that of the financially-interested liquor man the Trade <will be doomed. I quite see the force of ilr. Palmer's adroitness. But he is not the first member of the Trade to endeavour to persnade the opponents of the liquor system that no-license is ceeless, bat those who have investigated know its fnU value. In spite of the existence and the machinations of the licensed. Trade in other electorates the faithful twelve have demonstrated to the fall all claims made by the ratipnal advocate of noj license. It is not our- goal— "A&stinence for tbe individual," nor is it "Prohibi*

tion for the State,'" but it goes a long way to prepare the way for both, as Mr, P. well knows.

Messrs. Palmer and Foster, being financially interested, are not prejudiced, as we are who only work for the Commonwealth, and so Mr. Foster speaks logic and facts based upon experience (vide Mr. P.) when he says that if bars are closed at 1 p.m. on Saturdays more drink will be consumed. Mr. Palmer calls it "twaddle" to ask why the Trade does not support early closing if more business can be done in shorter hours.— I am, etc., W. J. MacDERMOXT.