MONROE DOCTRINE

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 287, 4 September 1928, Page 11

MONROE DOCTRINE

LEAGUE COUNCIL REFUSES TO DEFINE IT IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE ESTABLISHED (United Pre?s Association.— By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) (Australian Press Assn.—United Service.) Geneva, September 2. Following Costa. Rica’s request for a definition o' the Monroe Doctrine, the League Council, after a lengthy consideration, transmitted a non-committal reply affirming that Article 21 of the Covenant confines itself to referring to the engagements of States without attempting to define them, which is a task not for the authors of the Covenant, but the sole concern of the States which accepted such engagements. The reply is regarded as important in establishing the principle that the League will never undertake to interfere with treaties made outside its own auspices. LIQUOR REFERENDUM THE NEW SOUTH WALES POLL MAJORITY AGAINST PROHIBITION Sydney, September 3. The present, majority against Prohibition is 489,667 out of a total enrolment of 1,426,000. A separate poll was taken of the Federal Capital Territory, which hitherto had been a "dry” area and a three-to-one majority voted for the sale of liquor at Canberra. LICENSES FOR CANBERRA (Rec. September 3, 10.55 p.m.) Sydney, September 3. As a result of Saturday’s vote the Federal Government has decided immediately to issue licenses for the sale of liquor at Canberra, which hitherto has been a .dry area. POLL IN VICTORIA IN 1930 (Rec. September 3, 10.55 p.m.) Melbourne, September 3. The Government has announced that a poll throughout the State to decide whether liquor licenses should be abolished will be taken In Victoria in 1930. “TIMES UNFAVOURABLE TO PROHIBITION” COMMENT OF LONDON PAPER < (Australian Press Association.) (Rec. September 3, 9.15 p.m.) London, September 3. The “Daily Telegraph,” in au editorial, says: "The result.of the Australian Prohibition poll is a sign that the times are unfavourable to Prohibition. It has proved a disastrous failure where tried in Europe. In the United States it is law without the force of law. In Australia it has been more heavily defeated in the States consulted than its advocates ever anticipated. Apparently the Commonwealth will be spared the experience of Canberra, which has proved, as in Canada and New Zealand, that enforcements in. provinces and districts is more farcical than nation-wide. Meantime, drunkenness is visibly declining wherever there is a minimum of Interference with private habits. Upon this more than upon schemes of regulation believers in true temperance found their hopes.” VIEWS OF TRADE IN NEW ZEALAND “VERY SATISFACTORY” "The result of the. referendum was very satisfactory,” said Mr. Percy Coyle, official representative of the United New Zealand Licensed Victuallers’ Association, when seen by a "Dominion” reporter yesterday. “A substantial majority against the ‘drys’ was anticipated.” Asked if he thought the result would have any bearing on the forthcoming referendum in New Zealand, Mr. Coyle said he certainly thought it would. “Such a decisive majority,” he declared, “proves conclusively that prohibition is not wanted in New South Wales, and it would be outside the realm of practical politics to have continuance in New South Wales and prohibition in New Zealand, and I believe the general public of New Zealand in the light of events in America and the rejection of prohibition in New South Wales will not hesitate to express themselves accordingly at the coming poll.” RESULT EXPECTED BY ALLIANCE THE COMPENSATION PROVISION (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) Dunedin, September 3. Referring to the interim figures on the New South Wales liquor referendum. Mr. Charles Todd, president of the New Zealand Alliance, said that the result was expected. Compensation to the trade was the principal reason for tlie defeat, and again there had not been the same educational work in Australia as in New Zealand and America.