MISSION OF LABOUR

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 309, 24 September 1918, Page 8

MISSION OF LABOUR

Sir.-The Hon. J. T. Paul is wie national president of the New Zealand Labour Party. This rrentleman, an occupant of a seat in tlio Upper House, lias made a deliverance on the licensing question. This deliverance, lie says, is expressive of the Labour Party's view. He traversed certain petitions now before tho public. With regard to the first patifcion, which is tho payment of compensation to the tune of four and a lialf millions for immediate Prohibition, Mr. Paul says: "This is :i limitation of democratic rights." That Prohibition is the limitation of democratic rights will he perfectly clear and well understood ,by anyone who has given the least thought to the question, and it is gnitif.viii!.'; io find the president of the New Zealand Labour Party expressing so strongly a democratic principle. Concerning the second petition, which offers* three issues, Mr. Paul makes quite an erroneous statement. Vie says: ''Tin's petition asks for a poll." Now, this petition docs nothing of the kind. I have read it through. It asks for an alteration of the ballot paper for the next general election, and I am ■■urprised that a gentleman of Mr. Paul's intelligence should cither so misread the petition or so mislead the public and the Labour Party. I think the three issues are perfectly democratic. Suppose, as was the case at the last election, 257,000 people vote for national continuance, and 247.000 for national Prohibition; the carrying of national continuance was the result of a democratic poll. Now, suppose the Prohibitionists at tho next general election—provided three issues are on the ballot paper — vote solidlv as in 1914, they will total 247,000 votes; and suppose 257.000 votes are divided between national ownership and national continuance, of this number 157,000 for national ownership, and 100,000 for national continuance, what issue, democratically speaking, should he carried? Does Air. Paul, or any other man, conclude that because there is. a majority for Prohibition on such a poll that Prohibition should bo carried, when in the aggregate there aro 10,000 more individual votes cast against Prohibition, and in favour of the continuance of the manufacture, sale, and use of alcoholic beverages, for State ownership provides for continuance? It. would be quite unfair to declare. Prohibition carried en such a. vote, because there would he an absolute majority as in 1014. against it. There is, therefore, nothing undemocratic in providing for an absolute majority on any one issue. I notice also the Prohibition people, like Mr. Paul, have not quite a misconception of tliii second petition containing three issues. Mr. Paul, however, wants to edd another issue, and that is national Prohibition without compensation. In tho secou/1 petition there is no issue for compensation. Still, in putting forward this at this stage, when the Prohibition people have conceded compensation, the Hon. Mr. Paul has evidently given himself over to what Mr. Sempie calls "commercial cannibalism. - ' I trust I have made the points I desire to make quite clear.—l am, etc. G.K.