THE LOCAL OPTION VOTE.

Evening Post, Volume LII, Issue 163, 1 December 1896, Page 6

THE LOCAL OPTION VOTE.

♦ TO THE EDITOR. Sib — In your issue of yesterday you called attention, very properly, to the anomaly likely to happen in many cases by voters striking out the centre line only. To avoid this difficulty, voters have only to strike out the third line also, and then the voting paper will be complete. My object in writing this letter is to remind the electors of Wellington that the reduction clause was inserted in the Act principally to effect a reduction of licenses in electorates where the licenses were out of all proportion to the population, such as the West Coast of the South Island — viz., Kumara/(63 .people to each license), Greymouth, Brunnerton, Hokitika, and Westport, and also to some extent in Dunedin and other places ; but this does not apply to Wellington, where the licensei are no greater now than some 20 years ago, although the population has quadrupled. It being now 38,000, and only 49 licenses, equals 775 people to each license, add to which floating population inseparable from such a large seaborne traffic as Wellington commands, it can readily be imagined the accommodation for the public is inadequate, especially on holidays, race and show days. Again, as no increase of licenses is likely to obtain, and the rapid growth of the city, it can easily be seen that we shall within a very few years have 1000 people to each of the 49 licenses within the district, being nearly the double of that existing in many< Other large cities in New Zealand. Indeed, Sir f Eobert Stout and other advocates of Temperance have named 750 as their notion of the population to each license, and this limit has already been exceeded in Wellington. 'lfhere is another feature of the question which present* itself on this occasion, and which may influence the minds of the benevolent. If reduction by any chance is carried on Friday next, a most worthy old couple now living privately, as they have for years paiit, on the rent of their hotel, will be made paupers, for through no fault on their part the license of their hotel was endorsed a year ago. The then licensee has since.lef t the hotel, and the house has since been conducted, as the police can testifj', entirely to their satisfaction. It is the only hotel having an endorsement, therefore the Licensing Bench has no option but to refuse the license under the Act, as only, one of the two years has expired which the Statute requires to cause an endorsement to be cancelled. I would further add, if the Bill passed last session by the House of Representatives had not been thrown out by the Upper House, this case of hardship would not now exist, as the Bill provided to reduce tho term from two to one year. On both grounds I therefore appeal to the electors to strike out the two last lines on the voting paper. I am, &c, Faie Play.