MR. G. W. RUSSELL AND THE MAJORITY QUESTION.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14917, 16 March 1914, Page 5

MR. G. W. RUSSELL AND THE MAJORITY QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR OF "THE *RE3S."

Sir, —In his Phillipstown speech, Mr G. W*. Russell asked hovr Mr Massey proposed to find the revenue if Prohibition were carried on a 55 per cent, majority vote of the people. Evidently J Mr Russell is of opinion that the problem is not likely to arise so long as the three-fifths barrier is maintained. Mr Russell assumes that it •will be Mr "Massey's problem to find the I rerenuo fonr and a half years after J next election, which is the nearest date that a prohibition vote could come into operation. For my own part I" sincerely hopo that when the problem does havo to be faced there will be no such politicians as Mr Russell on the Treasury benches. It may be of interest to the Avon electors to learn that in his anxiety to place himself in the I Mackenaie Ministry Mr Russell was willing to pledge himself to the 5o per cent, majority. "When the personnel of the Ministry was being considered and Mr Russell was rather Insistently and threateningly pushing his claims, ho approached Mr L. M. Isitt to withdraw his opposition, but Mr Jsitt. speaking an a temperance representative, wanted to know what use a three- >.} f> " ,an , VjBl& to tlle Prohibitionists. Mr liusse'.'i thereupon said he could not support the bare majority, but was willing to go half way. " After the Mackenzie .Ministry was formed Mr took the late Mr (J-00. Laurenson with him into Mr Russell's room and secured a confirmation of the promise that_ he would support and vote for a .j.3-1.) Bill: the whole matter was reported to the X.Z. Alliance, and at a social tendered to mc by my supporters in Linwood, 1 made the announcement that Mr Russell was a supporter of the oo per cent, majority o-i the licensing question. Mr Russell subsequently denied the statement. On May loth, 1912, Mr Isitt wrote to Mr Rxissell asking for an explanation of , his denial, and gave mo a copy of his letter, which I now enclose for publication. I have also another interesting document on the question of the majority, •written by Mr Russell at the time he was representing Riccarton. On that occasion he promised to stand for the bare majority ond in support of colonial option. The letter which I enclose will speak for itself. In the same year that this letter was Avritten the Progressive Liberal Association submitted a number of questions to the candidates, and filthougb Mr Russell promised to support every proposal submitted, the Association decided to give its support to Mr Rollcoton who, though not prepared to support ail their demands, was considered a more satisfactory and reliable man. If you will permit mo, T will, in another letter, tell Mr Russell how Mr Massey, or any other Prime Minister, can get the revenue without altering the present incidence of taxation. It might, however, be interesting to learn from Mr Russell what were his own revenue proposals when he promised to si!rport the oo per cent, majority for national prohibition, and previously promised to vote for colnial option : on a bare majority basis. On the Prohibition question I know no political party. There are individual members of the Reform and of tho Liberal Party J who are supporters of the jbnre ' majority or of the 55 per cent, majority, j aild I am myself attached to a party I which, as a party, is prepared to trust tho people with an unfettered referendum law, and with the initiative in the hands of the people.—Yours, etc.. J. MeCOMBS. President, Canterbury No-license Council. IFoi space reasons w<; have abbreviated our correspondent's letter by omitting some ]>aragrnphs discussing, on familiar lines, the general question of what the Prohibitionist* oonsider the injustice of refusing them the bare majority. We have left intact, the rest of his letter dealing with Mr Russell.—Ed. "The Press."] (Copy.:* May 15th, 1912. l>oar Mr Russell, —Some of the Prohibitionist friends have directed my attention to a statement made by you that you were still pledged to tho three-fifths handicap on tho local option vote. You will remember that in an interview that I had with you, prior io the formation of ih<: Cabinet, you promised mo definitely that you would support tho 46-O0 on National Prohibition. After tho. formation of the Cabinet you repeated your promise, an J told mo that I was at liberty to mako ifc known, and I at onco apprised tliQ R-e?. J. Da.«.v*m, secretary of the Alliinne, of the position. 1 suppose, therefore, that your , disclaimer merely refers to the local option issue ; but f should be glad if you would kindly authorise mo to tell tho friends tin's is so, as sonic of them have J ;al?en the paragraphs in the "Times" ns indicating that you are still three-fifths all round. —Yours truly, (Signed) L. M. ISITT. [This letter has not yet been answered. --.I. McC.J (Copy.) Christchurch, May 21st. 1890. To the Secretary, Prohibition League. Dear Sir, —I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of May 18th, and havo much pleasure in replying thereto. I may say at once that, as your League is aware, J was returned at List election as a. thrc-v'-fifths majority supporter, consequently. I cannot go back on. that pledge; neither do I think the League would wish mc to, while sitting in the present Parliament. I have, however, fully indicated my intention of standing at next flection ns a-candi-date on the platform of the bare majority. Regarding colonial optiop and control of clubs, at my meeting at Papanui I distinctly pledged myself to support the Temperance party neso session, as, indeed, I did last session. I shall carefully peruse all the speeches I made, and see whether I am bound by the three-fifths majority for .colonial option; if I am not, 1 shall next session vote tor the bare majority on that point. I should like to add that, personally. I think it a mistako to introduce any legislation next session which may provide a door for the false friends or avowed opponent's rt the Act trussed last session to seek to wreck that mea.siim. I th'nk it would have been far better to rest on what has been secured until nex'. poll is over. However, you may rest assured that I, and others, vtill watch closely what-

over may be proposed, so that there may be no loss of the hard-Fought victory secured last year.—l am, Sir, Yours sincerely, feigned) G* WARREN* RUSSELL.