PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18675, 26 April 1926, Page 5

PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

—"Si to Tax who* or "tbx raise. Sir,—l have been • aWay for a few days and on my return find your editorial dated the 20th commenting on my letter of the 15th inst. Let me say at once that you are quite justified in calling., attention to the fact that,, the article from which I quoted was by'Mr Evans'Clark and was not an editorial expression of opinion by the "New York Times." I Bhould bo verj; sorry if any of your readers were led 'into thinking I was quoting the "Times" editorially. The omission to mention that it was a % contributed article was a pure oversight on my part, and I can only ask your readers to accept my assurance that it was entirely unintentional. ■ We might go on quoting extracts from American papers till your readers were weary of them. After all, as I have previously said, the crucial test is the ballot box. It is quite well recognised that the aim of the present agitation is to secure, if possible, the return of some "wet" candidates at the Congressional elections this year. The "wets" entertained similar hopes in 1924, when they are stated to have boasted they would elect 66 "wet" Congressmen, They lost, however, a total of 16 "wet" Congressmen and Senators. I will not venture on prophecy; I will only, suggest that New Zealanders possess their souls in patience until tnev see,-what the verdict of the voting citizens of the United States is the Congressmen corn© to be elected. The "wets" con get all they want if they can succeed in getting enough Congressmen of their colour elected to give them a bare majority in the House.. Time will show what their strength is.—Yours, etc., ,T. MALTON MURRAY, Executive Secretary, N.Z. Alliance. Wellington, April 23rd.