THE LICENSING POLL.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1303, 5 December 1911, Page 6

THE LICENSING POLL.

Those of the public who road the published arguments for and against Prohibition as put forward by tho extremists of both sides may well be puzzled to arrive at tho truth, or anything like the truth, respecting the merits of the question. Both sides have over-stated their ease—the one in depicting the benefits to follow on Prohibition, and thn other the evils -which come in its train. The questions whieh the public have to consider are two in number. The first is whether the evil of intemperance is so great in ■this country as to warrant the ruin of a large number of persons engaged in the lifjuor trade: a dislocation of the finances of the country, and a great upheaval, the e'tJects of which are impossible to estimate. Tho second question is .whether, after causing this ruin arid dislocation, the end aimed at would be accomplished with or without the creation of new and possibly worse evils. For ourselves, while not blind to certain evil effects of the liquor trade, we do not think that the drinking habits of the people warrant the extreme step of Prohibition: nor do \ve think that step could be taken without very serious consequences to the country. Whether or not tho electors of the Dominion hold this view will be determined on Thursday next, but in the meantime io is only right that those who will have to vote on the question should clearly understand what their vote will mean. There should bo no confusion of the coming noil with any previous licensing poll. The issue involved on the present occasion is far more sweeping than at, any previous time. The No-License issue, of course, still remains, but a Xo-Liquor issue is added. A great many people in the past have felt that the No-License poll is a healthy stimulus to those engaged in the trade to conduct their houses in a manner that will place them above reproach A very drastic means uo doubt of keeping the hotelkeepers up to the mark and in some respects a very unfair one, because (he manner in whieh the hotels are conducted is not the real test applied by the bulk of the public in , casting their votes. Still, there is no question that there has been a marked improvement in the manner in which the majority of the hotels have complied with the spirit as well as with tho letter of the licensing law. Those who in the past have voted No-License with the certain knowledge that even if No-License were carried they would still be able to obtain such liquor as they might desire can no longer view the situation' from that standpoint. Thov have to face the possibility of tlie i\o-Ljnuor issue being carried. The Prohibition party are very confident that the great bulk of those who vote No-License will also vote NoLitjuor; and that those who fall away on the No-Liquor issue will bo replaced by others who consider it . the only logical issue of the Prohibition movement. \Ve differ with the Prohibitionists on that point. It is unlikely, in our opinion, that there will be so large a vote cast for NoLiquor as is cast for No-License. In_ this respect we shall not be surprised to see the Prohibitionists suffer a set-back. A large proportion of the votes cast for No-License are given on purely sentimental grounds. The evils of intemperance stir the sympathies _ of a large section of the public with the victims and without any great amount of thought -they rush to No-License as the safe and only remedy. They do not weigh what the enforcement of tho remedy will cost the country i morally and financially. The NoLiquor issue may force many of these well-meaning people to probe tho matter a little deeper. Section 21 of the Licensing Act Amendment -Act, 1909, provides that in the event of National Prohibition being carried "it shall bo unlawful for any person to import into New Zealand, or to manufacture, sell or have in his possession for the purpose of sale, intoxicating liquor of any description. 1 ' Exemption is made of liquor kept for medicinal, scientific, sacramental, or industrial purposes j exclusively, but apart from these exj cmptions the carrying of National Prohibition means that anyone manufacturing, importing, or having liquor in his possession becomes liable to (i fine not cxccoding £100 iu t the ease of a flxst oEancc, and to a,

sentence not exceeding three months' imprisonment for any Kiil>K;:r|nrnt. offence. This is what National Prohibition means. .In J9OJ the. New Zealand Alliance protested in the strongest possible tonus against the famous No-Liepior clause which Mil. Kkddox attempted to slip into the Licensing Act of that year—to-day the Alliance asks the electors to vote to give effect to a clause of exactly the same nature. The objections raised by the No-License leaders in 1901 exist just as strongly to-day and we arc of opinion that the doctors will realise this and vote accordingly.