STATEMENTS CRITICISED

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 34, 8 August 1925, Page 6

STATEMENTS CRITICISED

TO TBI (DROa.

Sir,—May I on behalf of the 300,791 prohibition voter* the Allunoe "presents protest against Archdeacon Williams' remark, when, as president of the Licensing Reform Association, appearing before the Prime Minister, he said that prohibitionists "think that by keeping conditions as bad as possible they will drive people into voting • for prohibition." I submit that the statement is in defiance of historical facts, and invite the archdeacon to name a single restriction placed on the Trade that was put there by request of the Trade. All have been put there by demand of the prohibitionist*. Archdeacon Williams deplores what he calls "dragooning candidates." He is now associated with Mr. C. Speight, the brewer, who in 1919 sent a per.emptory letter to candidate* containing these amongst other words : "You are requested to furnish replies . . . 'Yes' or 'No. 1 . . . Are you in favour of continuance? Are you in favour of State purchase? Are you in favour of prohibition? . . . Doubtless you fully realise the important, bearing your attitude will have on. the ejection." Not a bad effort at "dragooning," that. The attitude of the majority of the clergy in the Anglican Church may b« judged from two things. First, General Synod in 1922 passed a resolution stating it to be "the bounden duty of Christian people, unless 'they are prepared to vote for total prohibition, to find some other drastic remedy." Secondly, by the fact that in his address as head, of the Anglican Church to General Synod this year, Archbishop Juliui referred to corporate control as having been offered as "some other drastio remedy," and said of it: "It may perhaps advantage the Trade, but will certainly do serious harm to the community." That so well reflected th« mind of Synod that the matter -was not even debated.

An attempt is being made to lead the public to believe that the licensed trade are sincerely anxious that this scheme of corporate control should be tried. The president of the Licensed Victuallers' Association was one of the deputation, Mr. A. S. Duncan, secretary of Ward's Brewery, was another. Both spoke as favouring this "reform." But on 29th July last this same Mr. A. 8. Duncan, in his capacity as secretary of Wards, Ltd., addressed a letter u> the shareholders of that company asking their influence on behalf of what—corporate control? Oh, dear no! Let him speak for himself.. This is part of the letter:—

"I would respectfully ask all shareholders, in the interests of this company and tbeir investment > . . .to give your wholehearted support to the cause of continuance at the forthcoming poll, more particularly in the direction of hardening up our womanhood .against the 'sob' advertisements of the Probibibition Party." i Of course,-we appreciate the compliment to our advertisements. But does not this letter reveal the hypocrisy of those engaged in the Trade who for the purpose of blindjng the public, profess to desire "corporate control," but are actually using their money and organisation to secure votes for continuance?

The Prime Minister was certainly right when he said, that the question was "whether there should be total prohibition or continuance." -We tnist that in any legislation introduced the people will be given an opportunity of deciding that- dominant : question decisively, and that it will no longer be possible to count as votes for continuance thousands of* votes that have been definitely cast againat it.—l am, etc., J. MALTOK MURRAY, Assistant Secretary, New Zealand Alliance.