THE LICENSING LAWS

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22017, 15 February 1937, Page 6

THE LICENSING LAWS

TO THE EDITOH Ot THE PSESS. Sir, —The question of the licensing laws is one of national importance and yet, whenever it is raised in your columns, there is very limited discussion.

However, there was some consolation to be found in Mr G. H. B. Lill's correction of some of "Southlander's" inaccuracies. He COUld hdV6 gone on to remind "Southlattder" that it was the prohibitionists who made the first move to have the licensing issue excluded from the 1931 general election* in order to effect a saving to the Gov* ernment of the day, One 6f the leaders of that Government made light of the saving of a mere £12,000, and, indeed, it Was very little, as compared with the gift of £112,000 that the Government made to "the. Trade" in reducing the duty on certain liquors by fourpence a gallon—a saving- to "the Trade" which, for obvious reasons, could • not, be passed on to the Consumer.

"Southlander" put in a plea for prohibition when he said, "That offer (a Vdte on the licensing issue for Invercargill, the expense to he met by the anti-prohibitionists) was. rejected, gfeatly to the delight of the prohibit iidnists, and some other interests that Were decidedly ndt prohibitionists;" These "other interests'' we have a right to assume, were business interests, though the business men themselves would not necessarily be prohibitionists. The action of such business men" was paralleled by the Masterton tradesmen, who. when the liquor interests claimed to have Secured the signatures of 80 business men to a petition for the return of the hotel licenses, ndt only "called their bluff" by challenging them td publish the names of the signatories to the petition, but iiiimediately secured the signature's of more than 120 business men in favour of nolicense, and published their names in the leading newspapers of the province.

In other words, "Southlander" has endorsed the legitimate Claim of the prohibitionists that increased business is a natural outcome df prohibition. As for the redistribution of licenses, one cannot help wondering why this trade should enjoy such privileges above other tradesmen. If any other person, by reason of a lack of trade, has to go out of, business, his license cannot be transferred to anydne else in any other part df the country, so by what strange process of reasoning do you and "Southlander" claim privileges for hdtelkeepers? Again, is it not most inconsistent to deplore the number' of motor accidents, crimes of brutality, etc., and at the asme time work for the continuance of a iradfe which is very largely responsible for sUch accidents and crimes? "the principle of do-operation enunciated by JesUs Christ in His words, "He that is for Us, is not against us," is as applicable to-day as' it was in His day. Consequently, he who is

not working for the expulsion from our shores of this dreadful bar to progress is obviously working- hand-in-alove with "the Trade." —Yours, etc.. FRED. SANDERSON. Granite February 10, 1937.