LIQUOR ISSUE

Evening Post, Volume XCVIII, Issue 139, 10 December 1919, Page 10

LIQUOR ISSUE

PROHIBITIONISTS REPLY

AGAINST STATE PURCHASE

SOLDIERS AND THEIR VOTES.

A Prohibition "rally" was held in the Town Hall last night, when a reply was made to the statements of the Moderato League. The Rev. R. S. Gray presided, and the hall was crowded in every part. Taken altogether the meeting was orderly^ but a section at the back was responsible for some interruptions and for a reception, which was distinctly unchivalrous, to two young ladies who contributed a portion of the musical programme. Mr. Gray said he counted it a- privilege to preside at the meeting, and to introduce two speakers who had done their bit overseas and were going to do » bit more that evening. Captain G. W. Morice was the first speaker. He was immediately asked, "Where's your R.S.A. badge?" Mr. Gray intervened: "Allow me to say about the conduct of this meeting, I am going to conduct it, you can interrupt me as much as you like; but I insist on a fair hearing for those who are not so accustomed to public speaking." Captain Morice said that one of the most hopeful features of the campaign was the part being taken by the young people. That was an indication that if they did not win at this election, as he believed they would, they were going to win in the future. There was not a nation that took part in the war that did not have to take some steps to curb the drinking habits of the people. That was one of the lessons of the war. He went away a prohibitionist, and he came back more of one. In some respects, however, his views had-been broadened, and orie respect was with regard to the rum ration. When he got to the front line and saw the awful conditions there, he found that the rum ration was justified'; but it w_6-_also abused in some cases; Even under the strictest military control they could not prevent the abuse ol it on occasions. Every digger at the Front knew that there were cases of this kind. \ A voice: "Rather." Mr. Gray: "You need not describe yourself in such a loud voice." (Laughter.) ASSET OR LIABILITY? Captain Morice said one of the Moderate League speakers protested against a Prohibition poster showing a young boy with the question, "Asset or liability? Which will the Liquor Trade .make him?" The Moderate League speaker asked, "Were not the 100,000 men who vlent to the Front assets?" The great majority of them, said Captain Morice, were a very distinct asset; but a very small proportion were a very decided liability owing to their previous contact with the liquor traffic. What about ■ those men who ran across the traffic on the way to the Front, and never reached the firing line? What about those who came in contact with the liquor traffic, and disgraced themselves, and got behind the barbed-wire fences? Taken all round, the men were a splendid asset; but there was a small proportion that was a liability, and New Zealand should not be content with having a finer standard than any other country. They wanted 100 per cent, asset' and no liability. The first thing they should do to attain that was to get rid of the liquor traffic. LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT. Proceeding to deal with the objections to Prohibition on the ground that it infringed the "liberty of the sub ject," Captain Morice said there was no such thing as the liberty of the subject. Murder and such crimes were forbidden for the public good; but no one said the liberty of the subject was curtailed. The Evening Post had said, "The rights of the public.should promptly prevail over the liberty of the subject.' Needless to say, The Post was not talking about the liquor traffic. The article was about spitting on the footpaths—such a terrible tiling, so many people were killed by it every year, so much misery was caused! REVENUE QUESTIONS. The Trade argument that Prohibition meant higher taxation contained two fallacies. One was that from the time Prohibition came in they wouW require the same revenue as now. This was entirely incorrect. There was bound to be a reduction in expenditure for police, charitable aid, asylums, etc._ Even if the same revenue were required it did not follow thai there would have to be more taxation. The most would be that it would he in a slightly different form. The money now spent on the liquor traffic, some £5,000,000, would be spent on other things, and would be contributing to revenue. If the money were spent on luxuries there would be more contributed to the revenue. Anyway, if any one were to pay more taxation it i would not be the drinkers; it would be ] those who were now teetotallers, and they were not squealing. Tho liquor traffic had said that in March of last year there were 103,000 people in New York addicted to drugs; but Prohibition did not come into force until Jury. It might be anticipated that people who were slaves to drink would seek something to replace it and would resort to drugs; but there was no evidence to support this. In fact, under Prohibition the drug habit soon disappeared. In Kansas State it had disappeared to such an extent that they had now ceased to classify sufferers from drugs. The fact was thai drink and drugs went hand in hand, but the drink evil overshadowed the drugs. When tie* drink was removed, the evil of the drug habit was exposed. Wipe out the drink and they killed two birds with one stone. TJ_3_BMPLOYMI_NT. ' The Trade said Prohibition would! put 5000 people out of employment. He dlid not know how they arrived at this estimate unless they included all tho police, warders, asylum attendants, doctors, and lawyers, whose employment wasiiow rendered necessary by the traffic. Even if this number of people were unemployed they would be better than being employed as .they were at the present time. But he did not believe for a minute that there would be unemployment. Increased expenditure in other directions meant more employment. A hundred thousand men went to the Front, and they had been returning a thousand at a time, but there had been no glut in the labour market. They had found places for all except those who would not work. The persons engaged in the liquor traffic were not more than would be-brought back in five troopships, and they had absorbed that number in a fortnight. They would have six months to absorb them in this case. Another advertisement had stated that the spread of Prohibition was partly responsible for the industrial unrest on the Pacific Slope. The drink had acted as an anodyne. Was it not an insult to labour to say that it was kept quiet only by being stupified, by being given a narcotic? Was it in tho interests of the labour that it should be kept down by such means? Surely a cause which resorted to such statements must be bankrupt of argument. (Applause.') When Captain Morice finished his speech a member of the audience rose and stated that as a returned ofilc«r, he wished to ask the .speaker, .whether he

was ever in France, what was his battalion, did he ever go over the top, and did he ever take the rum ration.

Captain Morice said he was in Franco with the Second Ballation of the New Zealand Rifle Brigade. (Applause.)

Mr. Gray asked the questioner to apologise for tho tone in which he asked the question.

Captain Morice said he went over the top three times, and on the last occasion doctors had to stitch him up in seventeen places. On innumerable occasions he distributed the rum ration to the men, I and on half-a-dozen occasions he took it himself when he had a chance of turningin afterwards. Mr. Gray-(to the questional'): "Yon said you were an officer in France. Most officers are gentlemen. (Loud applause.) If you are not an exception to the rule you will apologise." The questioner considered- he had nothing to a-pologise for. Jlr. Gray: "Then you are a cad and a coward." (Applause.) "THE MODERATE VIEW." Mr. D. S. Smith said he would savo trouble by saying that he was never in France, never went over the top, and never had amm ration. He went with the 40th Reinforcement, and owing to the kind of time they had none of the infantry went to the Front. Some people, the speaker went on to say, had a very fixed point of view. When he listened to Mr. Armstrong describing the joys of the moderate dinner-tabje, he thought: "Well, you have a very limited point of view." Let them have as much fun as they could, but let them get a broader vision, and consider other aspects of the case. Mr. Armstrong had produced a bottle and said. "You may think that is alcohol; it is only pale ale." Let them consider some aspects of the liquor traffic besides that indicated by the moderate dinner-table. The Year Book said that nine per cent, of lunacy cases were due to alcohol; but Dr.' Beatty, Superintendent of the Auckland Mental Hospital, said that 40 per cent, of cases were dne directly or indirectly to liquor. If men lost their reason, surely that was sufficient reason for wiping out the liquor traffic._ Sir Robert Stout had said that two-thirds of the crime in the country was due to the liquor traffic. None of the Judges of this country had attempted to measure the amount of divorce due to liquor, but the English Judges had" done so, and had said before a commission that the English divorce courts could practically close their doors if alcoholic liquor could be abolished. He took 80 per cent, of divorce cases as being due to the traffic, and said that represented his own experience in this class of case. Let them calculate the cost of that, which was to remain so that the moderate drinker could have pale ale on his dinner table. The Jewish Rabbi of this city, a member and ex-chairman of the Hospital and Charitable Aid Board, had said that 80 per cent, of the outdoor relief could be saved if the liquor traffic were out of the way. That estimate was confirmed by an estimate by the chairman of the Southland Board. Surely on any one of these accounts there was sufficient reason for the moderate \man agreeing to deprive himself of his bottle of pale ale. It would not be contended that the liquor traffic was any good to the children, and it was shown that 80 per cent, of commitments to homes were due to the traffic. Was life to be any worse for the moderate if the liquor traffic were abolished? After a year's experience of Prohibition, one of the largest hotelkeepers hi Michigan had stated that the moderates were still enjoying life, and that it had not meant a ereat difference to them. If they had Prohibition they would, for one thing, cheapen the cost of life insurance. THE QUESTION OF COMPULSION. It had been said that, "take away the drink and you reduce a mail's moral fibre." But if a man had the strength to do without the drink, his moral fibre was not injured, and the others were just the men who should be helped. Some of the greatest reforms in history had been brought about by compulsion. Prohibitory laws had been necessary to teach the strong to do "their duty towards the weak. Slavery had to be abolished by these means. Child labour was fought by similar means, and the "liberty of the subject," and the "right of a man to do what he wished with his own," were arguments brought against tho law. The spread of knowledge was brought about by compulsion in the face of opposition. They invited the moderate drinker to look beyond his dinner table, to see the lunacy, the divorce, the crime, the reformatories, and children's homes that were the result of the traffic, and then to join in enacting a prohibitory haw: "This people shall not drink liquor."

MR. GRAY'S ADDRESS.

Mr. Gray said he was pleased to see 21some people there who were not Prohibitionists. He would not give a hand's turn for the chance of addressing an audience of Prohibitionists, except to ask them to get to work. Dealing with the soldiers' vote first he said, "When the Moderate League advertised in the New Zealander that the moment your backs were turned ——"

A voice: "What did Lady Stout say in the N.Z.E.F. Chronicles?''' Mr. Gray: "Well, I'm not Lady Stout and I'm not her husband. I expect she's glad you're not either." (Laughter.) He proceeded to say tha* when the Moderate League advertised that the moment the soldiers' backs were turned the Prohibitionists tried to stampede the Government into giving a poll they told a deliberate lie. WBm thoy said that while tho Prohibitvioni_ts said they wanted the soldiers to have a vote thoy were doing their utmost to prevent it i_iey told another deliberate lie.

A mocking-voice: "Oh, for shame.!" Mr. Gray: " Yes, that's -what I said, but not in such a sickly voice." The Moderate League told two definite and positive lies and they told a third lie by suppression, of ttie truth, ,-in never even mentioning, when purporting to tell the whole facts, that there was a National Efficiency Board set up by tho Government. Mr. Gray associated certain members of the Moderate League, whom he named, with his charge of lying, and challenged them to take action against him on it.

HISTORY OF THE POLL.

Mr. Gray proceeded to say that the proposal for a poll did not come from the Prohibitionists in the first plaoe. It came from the National Efficiency Board of five expert business men set up by the Government. A business man called on the speaker and Mr. A. S. Adams, and stated thaff- it would cost 4^ millions to wipe out the liquor traffic in six months; and they were asked if they would agree to the payment of this amount by way of compensation. At first they refused, but after consideration they agreed to sink their principle against the payment of compensation in order to secure tha immediate abolition of the traffic and save the moral and material wastage which would take place in the meantime if they waited for four and ahalf years. A convention was held shortly afterwards, and the New Zealand Alliance passed a motion asking for a poll on the Efficiency- Board's proposal.. They also passed a motion stating that they would not have a poll unless every soldier at the Front could havo a vote. The, Moderate League stated that the soldiers owed it to the league that they got a vote. That was a lie. The New ZeaSafnd Alliance was the first body to give public expression to its demand for a vote fof~the „oldier.

AN APPEAL TO THK SPLDI_ST,S

Ha bpii&vgd that every, soldig. .who

went over tha top was actuated deep down by the desire to do the best for his country. Though they might barrack him and laugh at "wowsers" and say they would have a good time and their drink, they desired to help the country. He could understand that if thoy believed what tho Moderate League told them they would be indignant; ho would be himself; but he did not believe the returned soldiers wished to | bo used as tho Trade was using them in its posters: "Follow the soldiers." Tho decent and respectable returned soldiers were not going to be dragged at the chariot wheels of the Trade. REASONS AGAINST CONTINUANCE. He asked if thoy could give him one reason for the liquor trade continuing. A voice: "Yes. Why did Captain Morice take the other rum rations if the first did him no good?" Mr. Gray: " I can answer tliat. Are we to keep the whole of the Trade going to provide rum rations for the next war?" A voice : TrLeave the diggers alone." Mr. Gray. "Did yon ever say that to tho liquor trade?" He could give many reasons why the Trade should not continue. Ho related a case of four persons burnt to death in a house because •tbey were under the influence of liquor. Some member of the audience made a sneering interjection. Mr. Gray : "I am speaking to men, not to a beast." (Applause.) He related recent instances of murder and violation of young girls by men who were under the influence of liquor. In reply to an interjection, he said he did not for a moment contend that all such crimes were due to drink, but drink aggravated the tendency to crime. AGAINST STATE CONTROL. They could not vote for State control, because, that meant first State purchase, costing fifteen millions. Why should they spend all this money? Let them give Prohibition a trial for three years, and if they were not satisfied ask for a poll with a straight-out issue between State Control and Prohibition.

A voice: "Will you support the demand?"

I Mr. Gray : "I will, and if they give Prohibition a straight go, and it proves a failure, I % will come out and speak for the next bfcst solution." If they were willing now to pay fifteen millions to the Trade, they had much less sense thai* he thought they had. Even Mr. Findlay and Mr. Armstrong did not agree on the question. Mr. Findlay said they would be able to close 40 per cent, of the publichouses. If so, why buy them? The liquor trade was a dirty trade, and it soiled everything it touched. He quoted a liquoi advertisement telling the people to vote for Continuance, with this addition : "The voter must strike out the two bottom lines. Otherwise the vote is invalid." He was sending that to the Attorney-General, and he believed a prosecution would follow. Thoy could not vote for the continuance of a trade that did such things, and they could not iVote for State purchase to pay fifteen millions to such men. The only way for a man to vote who loved his country and his fellowswas for Prohibition. IN AMERICA. The cables which the Liquor Trade was engineering just now dated back to 7th November and July (they hoped people would not look at the dates).

AE this "tripe" was absolutely beside the question. The Liquor Trade was trying to persuade the people that the Trade out here knew more about America than the Americans. If America was going to the dogs, why was it having Prohibition? , Twenty - eight States had gone dry before the' constitutional amendment was carried by wliich the whole of the United States wonld go dry in January next. It was because of the example of those States that tho Prohibition was carried. The reason was the reason that ho found ' in Kansas : a higher wealth per head, a, higher standard of education, less lunacy, less crime than in any wet State. Tho Prohibition was carried by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Congress, and ratified by forty-five States—ratification by thirty-six only was required. If the Trade came back it had to come back the same way, and it hadn't got, Buckley's chance. Why did the Americans do it ? Because of America', war debt and war lessons. Britain's debt was veiy much greater! but Britain could catch up if only the liquor trade was cirt out. America : wasn't saying anything about extra taxation. The Trade advertisements said that Sir Joseph Ward and Mr. Massey had both said Prohibition would | mean more taxation. But when did they say it?—ten years ago. On the last occasion they said nothing of the kind, though they were voting; for four- and a-half millions compensation. They had seen, however, Canada cut out a liquor , revenue of £90,000,000, and never faintly suggested extra taxation. New Zealand had better water-ways and resources, and could, by cutting out alcohol, outdistance the others. Another reason why the Tiade was to be cnt out in America was, as Professor Irving Fisher said, it meant a.n increase of 10 per cent, in efficiency. THE OPINION OF DOCTORS. Another reason was the moral reason. They asked the British Medical Association before the last poll to take a plebiscite of doctors on the use of alcohol as a beverage. The results came in to the Council of the British Medical Association, and certain doctors interested in tho trade, threatened at the meeting (it was reported in the Medical Journal) that if the results were made known they would leave the association. Fancy leaving the association if any hurt were done to tho liquor trade! The council decided that the residts be sent back to the districts, and the result was to come back Ito the council on 12th December,' two days after the date on which it was then expected that the election would be all.over. He did not know whether the results would ever be made known, but ho challenged them to disprove that the i votes did not represent a three or four to one vote in favour of Prohibition. The doctors of the country had voted heavily against alcohol as a beverage, and the ! doctors who were personally interested in liquor were preventing the vo_e from being made known. . | The Licensing Committee met the other day, and the inspector presented a special report on the hotels of Wellington. It had not been published. He proceeded ' to read from a report referring to the hotels by letters, and embodying complaints against the conduct of hotels, and remarking on the increase of drinking amongst women. Ho did not lenow j whether it was not the practice to publish such reports, but he asked them to

pass a motion protesting against such a report not being published on the eve of the licensing poll.

A seconder for the motion was promptly found.

Mr. Gray asked if anyone wished to move an amendment or speak to fie motion.

* The man who had asked the question of Captain Morice wished to speak. Ho did not refer to tho motion, however, but to the way returned soldiers were dragged into the discussion. After allowing him some latitude, the chairman ruled him out of order.

Mr. Gray, in conclusion, appealed _to the men who went to the Front to decide the Prohibition issue on the same ground that they decided whether they should go to the Front. If there were some Diggers who needed to be protected he asked tho others to deny themselves and vote for Prohibition. There waa no more Godlike spirit than that which prompted sacrifice for those who were weak.

In reply to a question, Mr. Gray confirmed his statement that he would support the taking of a poll in three years' time if there were a desire for it. After other questions had been answered, the man who had questioned Captain Morice addressed the meeting by permission. The burden of his speech was that the returned soldier should not be dragged into controversial questions, either by the Liquor Party, the Moderate League, or the Prohibitionists. He disclaimed any opposition to Mr. Gray. Sir. Gray briefly answered that the Prohibitionists had not been the first to bring the soldier into the discussion. They had, in fact, refrained from using a poster depicting a returned soldier. The meeting closed, as it began, with tho National Anthem. A pleasing musical programme had been supplied.

[Extended Report, Published by i Arrangement.]