LICENSING LAWS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 300, 19 December 1922, Page 3

LICENSING LAWS.

REFERENDUM IN SWEDEN.

DEFEAT OF PROHIBITION.

HOW WOMEN VOTED.

(By ARTHUR SHERWELL.j The complete detailed figures of the recent "consultative"' referendum on Prohibition in Sweden will not be officially published until the middle of this month, but enough information is available to give the broad result and to suggest conclusions which have a very practical bearing upon policy in this and in other countries. Sweden, as is commonly known, is a predominantly rural and an exceedingly sparsely peopled country. the abolition—nearly seventy years ago—of domestic distillation, which in the first half of the nineteenth century flooded the whole country with crude and potent potato spirit, and the establishment of a localised system of licensing, the trade in spirits, apart from special facilities for holiday resorts and roadside inns and postin<* stations, has been located chiefly in the towns. While Prohibition sentiment in the country districts, by one of those reactions from an excess of facility which are common enough in the drink history of nations, has had something to do with this, the most powerful cause has unquestionably been an. economic one The substitution of a licensing system, with its regulations and checks and taxes, for a common privilege ot distillation, automatically brought into plav the economic considerations which govern commercial enterprise, and sale facilities naturally followed the movements of population and industry. In other words, the trade became concentrated in the towns, and the people in the sparsely peopled country districts, or such of them as retained tne brann-vin-drinking habit, procured their supplies from the towns.

RESULT OF REFERENDUM

It was generally expected—and there was much to warrant the v.iew—that the preponderating vote of the rural communes, and the inclusion of women as qualified voters, would secure a national majority for Prohibition in Sweden as a whole, although Stockholm and Goteborg and Matmo—the three principal cities—were not generally expected to vote for Prohibition, even with beers containing up to 2i per cent by weight of alcohol (not proof spirit) excluded. The lesult has disappointed this expectation It is now known that Prohibition has "been rejected by a majority of over 35,000. There are in Swdeen 3.100,000 qualified voters. Of these, 1,813,000 or 08 per cent, recorded their votes, while 42 per cent of the voters abstained. The proportion of actual voters is not large, udeed by British standards but it compares not unfavourably with recent Parliamentary elections in Sweden. Of the 1 813,000 persons who recorded their votes, 889,000 or 49 per cent voted for Prohibition, and 924,000, or 51 per cent, voted against Prohibition.

COUNTRY v.- TOWNS.

The rural votes recorded represented 1 tiro-third, of the total vote and showed a majority of approximately I' 0 .0 0? f °' Prohibition out of a total rural vote of 1 190,000. This majority, although large, did not approach the figures anticipated. On the other hand, the urban vow, which in Sweden is relatively small, showed a majority (according to the latest available figures) of over 200,000 against Prohibition, the vote against bein<* more than double the vote for. In highly industrialised countries, with a relatively large urban population and many important towns and cities, a substantial town vote against Prohibition would be looked for. It accords with almost universal experience. Sweden, however, has relatively few large townsThere arc only 34 in the whole country with a population exceeding 10,000, and only four with 50,000 or more inhabitants.

In Stockholm, the largest city, less than 14 per cent of the voters (men and women alike) voted for Prohibition, while over 86 per cent voted against. In Goteborg, the second largest city 27 per cent voted for Prohibition and nearly 73 per cent against. In Malmo. the third largest town, 17 per cent voted for Prohibition and nearly 83 per cent against. ( These figures are impressive, and they add one more to the many reminders which world-wide experience has given to the practical licensing reformer, that the dominating fact in the determination of schemes of reform is the problem of the town. A scheme of licensing policy that does not frankly reckon with conditions in town and cities is foredoomed to substantial failure. THE WOMEN'S VOTE.

The great surprise of the referendum lies iu the distribution of the women's vote. Taking the country as a whole, the women's vote gave a majority for Prohibition of approximately 135,000. This is impressive, but it loses something of its significance when it is discovered that less than six out of ten (58 per cent) of the women who took part in the poll for Prohibition. In the principal cities the figures are startling. In Stockholm (we give round figures for simplicity) only just over 14,000 women voted for Prohibition, while over 70,000 women voted against. Actually, in that great city, more women than men, in the aggregate, voted against Prohibition. In Gottf>org less than 12.000 women voted for Prohibition, while over 23,000 voted against; while in Malmo, tlic third largest town, only 4.500 women voted for. while over 15,000 voted against Prohibition.

This vote of the women in Sweden (taken in conjunction with a small "stream of tendency" manifested in informal plebiscites recently taken in America) raises interesting questions. It has hitherto been taken for granted —in this country and elsewhere—that the women's vote, when conceded, would be cast overwhelmingly in favour of Prohibition, and there has appeared to be much warrant for this assumption in the early experience of New Zealand and Norway, pioneers in tile enlistment of women's support in this direction. Is this expectation ill-founded? And are ■women to be found a much more conservative force in licensing matters than has been confidently anticipated? If it should so turn out. it will change the whole outlook for licensing reform, and compel a reconstruction of policies.