THE LIQUOR QUESTION SOLVED

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2618, 13 November 1915, Page 3

THE LIQUOR QUESTION SOLVED

Sir, —For some months now the work of tho Liquor Control Board under tho Dcfcnce of tho Realm Act (3) has been iu operation in munition areas and in various parts of England. Tlio results havo been noted, and various deductions are being made. Extreme temperance people—equal to our advocates of Prohibition—am holding aloof from any part in the State control of liquor, and some even allege that "tho results may lie good now, but wait and so tho solution of tlio liquor question propounded and put iu operation by Mr. Lloyd George is damned with faint prnisfi bv the disappointed oxtrame section of the temperance people. i BfttJo.rfjtejßaggwft.

there is ground for much rejoicing in tliis system of Stato control. Hotels are being converted into tea and luncheon rooms where liquor is served only with meals. Drunkenness has decreased, poverty is vanishing, crimo diminished. Olio of your cablegrams informed us that "Figures compiled by tlie police show that there has been a considerable reduction in tho number of convictions for drunkenness—in many places this is equal to 50 por cent." There are always drawbacks to any new reform, and the same cablegram points out that while hotels are doing less business under the board's regulations there aro more customers at the liquor side of tho grocers' counters, although it is held that this is counterbalanced by more money being spent .with ordinary traders. And it is a strong indictment that more women aro drinking than formerly. Still the main fact stands —drunkenness is down. 50 per cent. As to poverty the same authorities have found "At tho end of July"—a year of war and six months of now regulations under §tate control—"there were fewer people in receipt of relief in England and Wales than ever recorded." What a magnificent resultl Drunkonness and poverty passing away under a Board of State Control that has power to close or keop open hotels, buy up hotels, pay compensation for loss of business, start hotels and open wet canteens in munition factories to save tho workers from going outside for their beer. But Prohibitionists are not happy as they view tho happy results of State control—drunkonness reduced by half and poverty less than ever recorded. Thoy cannot understand. Theso results have upset all their pet schemes. And what is inoro mystifying and perplexing is that all kinds of crimcs have diminished. There is less crime now in EuglancJ and Wales than there' has ever been in' any similar period (twelve months) for fifty years. Drunkenness, poverty, and crimo aro being virtually banished under State control.

The upsetting fact is that during all this diminution of. crime, poverty, and drunkenness, the drink bill of Great Britain lias inoreased by leaps and bounds. In 'six months it rose by eight millions sterling—ail increase of 12} per cent. This proves that an increased consumption of drink does not mean an increase in drunkenness, poverty, and crime—the fact is demonstrated to be the reverso. If it were otherwise, as is so frequently contended by persons who have not seriously studied tho drink question, the experience of Great Britain would surely support such contention. It must be tlie system of administration— aißoard of State Control— and the electors in this country are not even allowed to say that tliev approve of such a system being established in New Zealand as tho true solution of the liquor problem. All students of sociology have long since known that drunkenness, poverty, and, crimo are not dependent upon a nation's drinking capacity, and the experience of Great Britain lias given the most ample proofs of this truth.—l am, otc..' STATE CONTROL.