Evening Post. SATURDAY, JANUARY 19, 1889.

Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 16, 19 January 1889, Page 2

Evening Post. SATURDAY, JANUARY 19, 1889.

SAUNDERS v. WHISKY. « The election of Mr. William Saunders aa member for Lincoln is a matter for regret. We oannot, perhaps, blame the electors for preferring him to Mr. John Ollivier, but they should not have been rednced to any suoh ohoioo. Canterbury has plenty of better men than either, and it betokens a low condition of political vitality when we find the best men abstaining from offering themselves, and apparently content to let the representation fall into the hands of men of the Veer ALT. or Saunders calibre. Mr. Sadndbrs will do no good in the Honse for himself, his constituents, or the colony. He belongs quite as dißtinotlv as his late opponent, Mr. Ollivieb, to the politically played-out olass. He may not, indeed, like that gentleman, have a personal grievance which he desires to ventilate in Far-

liament, but he is a soured and disappointed man, who has had many chances of pnblic in the past, but has missed them all . He will be a recruit to the skinflint party , and will probably outvie even Mr. Goldie himself in cutting down salaries and experimenting to ascertain the very smallest sum upon which a Civil pervant can possibly manage to maintain life. The Service will have a bad time of it with Mr. Saundees, and he will be great when the Estimates are before the House. Economist though he be, we venture, however, to predict that he will next .soßsion cost the country more in taking up time with the discussion of his absurd State distillery Bchemo than he will be instrumental in Baying by any reduction of the Estimates. TMb State Distillery is Mr. Saunders' special "fad" at the present moment, and Lincoln being an agricultural district, he no doubt owes his election to tho visions which he has conjured up among the farmers of vast crops of barley whioh the State will always be ready to buy for whisky making, at a fixed and highly remunerative price. It is a singular fact that while advocating a scheme of this kind, Mr. Saunders is a pronounced abolitionist. He wants the State to assume the monopoly of the manufacture of whisky, for the benefit of the agricultural interest, while for tbe benefit of the community generally he advocates tho total prohibition of the drink traffic. We do not know precisely how he proposes to reconcile the two opinions, nor indeed is it worth enquiring. He is almost as great a teetotal zealot as Sir William Fox himself, and well nigh as intemperate in its advocacy, bnt on this particular subject of a State distillery they differ very widely, and when they met not long ago on a public platform to discuss the subject, the knight made mincemeat of the would-be distiller's arguments, and utterly discomfited him. Of course, however, even Sir William Fox failed to carry conviction to what Mr. Saunderb terms hi? mind, and so he has persisted throughout the election in making the manufacture of whisky a plank of his platform. And the Lincoln farmers have been gulled accordingly, even as their neighbours of Ashley were gulled not so long ago by Mr. Vekeall's scheme of getting chean money by means of a State Bank. Of the two schemes, we prefer Mr. Verrall's. There may be some solid good at the bottom of tho latter, although Mr. Vbrrall has not the wit to develop it, but the State distillery idea is simply preposterons, and could produco nothing but disaster wero it tried Indeed, the experiment of permitting distillation at all in the colony, apart altogether from tho State undertaking the work, has already been tried and failed. It was attempted with a view of helping the agricultural interest, and all the arguments now used by Mr. Satjndebs to show that it would do so were trottod out then, but they failed to stand the test of practical experience. The distillers made efforts certainly, but they exhibited a strango perversity in preferring sugar to barley as a material to mako it from, no doubt because it was cheaper. The quantity of barley used was found to be very small indeed, and ultimately it was found that the differential duty accorded as an encouragement to the new industry was causing such an enormous loss to the revenue that Parliament was glad enough to pay heavy compensation to shut the distilleries up. Wo do not think Mr. Satjnders will induce the Legislature to repeat tho experiment in any shape or with any variations. Certainly if distillation cannot safely be permitted to private enterprise, it should not be undertaken as a State enterprise. Mr. Sadnders, however, if wo understand his proposal aright, would absolutely prohibit the importation of all spirituous liquors, and would establish State distilleries to supply all who want such liquors. The prospect would be an appalling one to most consumers of spirits. Between having to drink New Zealand State-manu-factured whisky and drinking no spirits at all, probably a great number of persons wonld ohoobe the latter alternative. Mr. Saunders would say so much the better in the interests of temperance, but if everyone made such a choice, where would his friends, the farmers, be, and how would they benefit by the distillery scheme ? Again, if thero was no demand for the product of the State stills, where would the colony obtain the revenue when the Customhouse was closed to foreign importations. No practical good iB ever likely to result from the proposal, but, as we have said, we expect Mr. Satjndebs will get up a discussion on it which will waste a lot of time, and cost a good deal more than the value of any services which he is ever likely to render to the colony as member for Lincoln.