LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2981, 19 January 1917, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

EFFECTS OF PROHIBITION IN NEW ZEALAND

Sir, —Admitted I am only a student of temperance principles, is that any reason for a correspondent's refusal to face tho issue? I suppose brewers and publicans want to bo left alone in their business, but their multiplication or reduction does not affect the question, any moro than the multiplication or reduction of churches and parsons would affect tho church-going inclinations oM'he people. And to Wot out them all might not have any fiijiirious or beneficial effect upon public morals or religious faith. The New Zealand Alliance "Year Book" tells nio the firet district went ''dry" in 1894'. That year the drink bill was £3 Is. Id. per capita. In 1915 there were twelve "dry" areas, and the drink bill was £3 lGs. BJd. In 1894 there were 2412 licenses issued for the sale of intoxicants, and the consumption /of beer was 6.9 gallons per head of tho population. In 1014-the efforts of Prohibitionists had reduced the licenses to 1799 and tbo consumption had increased to 9.3 gallons per head. By 600 fower purveyors fifty per cent, more liquor was sold. In 1894 the drink bill was £2,099,552; in 1915, with 600 fewer facilities for consumption, tho' drink hill was £4,408,185. All prohibition effort is summed up in this: "From.a temperance viewpoint Prohibition is only fit for destruction. , " In 1894 thero were 4595 arrestahlc cases of drunkenness; in 1514 there WPi-o 13,145. These' figures represent 6.7 per 1000 in 1894 and 12.06 per 1000 of tlio population in 1914. As a student of the question, I would like to know what' Prohibition lias done for temperThe Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout, himself a former president of tho alliance, recently quoted statistics from the Supreme Court Bondi showing that all forms of crime had declined from 44 per 1000 of tlio population 'in 1887to 29.9 in 1912. which could only be explained, he said, by our rational system of education. Tho increased consumption of liquor with the arowth of Prohibition andthe. dpcr.easo in crime can only ho explained by the consistent and persistent netlect of Temperance. Prohibition and its. elaborate and expensive propaganda lias not promoted Tomperanco. More drinttio , and morn drunk°'iness is the result of this neglect. What shall be done with n propntrKiula that produces no beneficial results? My friend, Oeorpe T?. Wilso". secretary of the United K'"<jdo<n Alliance. writes from firosrenor Climbers, ~\Unohpstpr, uiulnr cl.-tn OotoW °- lfllßto -sav with rnwrd to the Old Country. m"1 the restrictions inhibited thpr«: "When allowance''is made for tV nj.il--I'ons of potential consumer , ! of on service abroad, or lniuWv < i; «oinlino at home, - it is evident Ibo consumption aroone the rcmai" ; »" civilian popnlfit'nn is at. Vast as hip l, !a« !fc was in 1914." Of course, it miiilit bo coninctiired, that tltn eon'iimnUon would l">ve b«°n hifrl'cr hut for the Boird of rcstricti«n>!. Tii vio'v of nil this. Stato control 's beiii" favoured as f'« next stp" i" '■- <">imine '■.form. This, Prohibition, would he ineffectual in inir Temperince, unless accomr-inied by prover and nioral <iuasion. It i= tbe leglect of tl ,Q se ilinf. lia.s proved tbe borrenof!': nf P'ohibi+.ion pffnrt in New Zealat>d._ The failure nf Prohibition is cstahlislied.—l am, etc., ' • O.S.