LICENSING QUESTION.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13603, 11 December 1909, Page 10

LICENSING QUESTION.

THE RECENT COMPACT,

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE

N.Z .ALLIANCE

(press association telegram.)

WELLINGTON, December 10

In reply to the, strictures of "the trade." the No-license party have now put their side of the question. Tne statement which has been prepared by the Rev. A. Dewdney and the Rev. J- Dawson, members of the Executive of the* New Zealand Alliance, points out that the Hon. Dr. Findlay, at the instance of the Prime Minister, approached the officials of the Party to know if there was any hope of a" modification of the Party's demand which might result in a possible working basis.

On certain points regarded as vital by both sides, such as the question ot the majority, Dominion option, the effect of prohibition, and the time when tho vote of the people should take effect, the Government knew what the demands of the Temperance party were, for they were embodied in a mil o'u the Order Paper, and tiiey did not ask that the party should surrender any vital principles, but with a view to what was legislatively possible, Dr. Findlay asked for tho irreducible minimum on the points nameu. The Temperance party understood that he was already in such touch with tbe liquor party as to cause him to believe that they were likely to consider tne points in such a way as might make the legislation possible. Upon receiving Dr. Findlay's request, which was regarded as under seal of confidence, the officers of the ..lliance put themselves into communication with the leaders of the party in ditterent parts of the Dominion, and finally Mr W. Spragg and the Rev. J. Dawson and tne j.iov. A. Dewdney were appointed by the executive to consult with Dr. Findlay.

At the first interview Dr. Findlay submitted the demand of the Liquor party, as follows: — (1) No (poll in 1911. nor until 1914. (2) Dominion prohibition and local option, with 00-100ths majority. Dominion vote not to take effect for six years. Local option not to take effect for three years, or Dominion prohibition by a bare majority not to take effect for six years. No-license by a three-fifths majority not to take effect for two years.

(3) Elimination of the reduction issue.

(4) Three issues on the ballot paper— (a) Continuance, (b) No-license, (c) Dominion prohibition, no voter having the right to vote for more than one issue.

These proposals the No-license delegates declined to discuss, but after many interviews an agreement, as published, was arrived at.

After being considered by the executive of the Alliance, its representatives were authorised to sign. The full details could' not be stated in .preois© legal phraseology, and solicitors representing each eide were appointed to act with Dr. Findlay.

The representatives of the executive had not been able to consult with the whole party, but felt that it would be able to secure its endorsement of the points agreed on. The Alliance representatives agreed "To further by all means in their power the passage into law" of the agreement. That meant that they undertook to secure, as far as possible, the support of the party, "and we desire to make it very clear that as signatories to the agreement we have to the utmost of our power honourably endeavoured to carry out its terms. Personally, we are still prepared to stand by those terms." The party endorsed every item but one of the agreement. It did not think it a right thing to run the risk of compelling a man to vote for what he did not want in order to secure what he did want or else compel him to refrain from voting, and therefore asked for separate ballot papers. Every other item —though, it meant surrendering a great deal—the party accepted. The representatives of the executive did not think the point a oruciaj one, and that in any oase the memorandum of agreement had not the force of a legal document. Further, on this particular point they felt they had no right to insist upon overriding the wishes of the majority.