DR. VAN DEE LA TALES

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 101, 26 October 1925, Page 3

DR. VAN DEE LA TALES

DRY FAKES—WET FACTS,

WHAT THE DR. SHOULD HAVE

SAID.

(By "The Little Minister.")

In his address yesterday the Rev. Dr. Van der Las was evidently more concerned with the presentation of dry fakes than.with the presentation of wet facts. His sins of omission in this regard wefo far more numerous than his sins of commission. Dr. Van der Las's talk therefore was a r>ald and unconvincing narrative. It showed his limitations, his circumscribed knowledge, and his limited acquaintance with tho oporation of the Volstead Act (prohibition) in U.S.A.

There are many men of high standing in U.S.A. who are really concerned ■ with the moral welfaro of their country. Such men are not likely to be led into . traducing America beyond the true facts. Dr. Van der Las did not venture upon a refutal of their statements as to the effects of Prohibition.

_ The highest and most distinguished citizens of America deplore with one voice the dire effects of Prohibition.

Senator Sherwood, as reported, says:. "It (Prohibition) has become a menace to orderly society. Crime under it has increased by 40 per cent. Divorce in thirty States has increased by 35 per cent., and murders have increased by 40 per cent. After four years' experience not one of the promises of tho AntiSaloon Leaguo has'come true." That is a statement Dr. Van der Las did not controvert because he could not.

Tho columns of all American newspapers bristle with reports of criffiand murder duo to the operation of Prohibition, and Prohibition enforcement agents enter private houses without warrant, and shoot and kill at sight.

Admiral Kimball says, " Volsteadism has kindled the Prohibition civil war now raging." The San Francisco "Examiner" (2nd August of this year) says: "In New York City there were 333 murders in 1924—the present rate is one per day. Chicago's record is worse than New York's. Many smaller cities in U.S.A. have even worse record s.

Why did not Dr. Van der Las narrate these facts? l

The Eev. Ernest W. Mandeville, one of the editors of' the American' "Churchman," says: "Prohibition lias fostered hypocrisy and deceit, and a largo new criminal class has come into existence. Drinking among young people has become most alarming and is considered a serious problem by both education authorities and clergymen.''

Dr. Van der Las is undisturbed. To him theso evils do not exist. There is a story of an ostrich that stuck its head in tho sand during a tornado, and said, "There is no storm." So this reverend gentleman would, like the fox that lost its tail, endeavour to induce the people of New Zealand to take on the calamity that has befallen U.S.A.

Ah, but America is wealthy under Prohibition. But Dr. Van de'r Las did not know when he held up U.S.A. as being vastly rich that New .Zealand under licensing is a richer country, and* the wealth of tho depositors in the private and post office savings banks is nearly double the wealth of tho depositors in the private and post office savings banks of America under Prohibition.

Under Continuance wo have in New Zealand a lower death rate than America under Prohibition. We have fewer deaths from alcoholism because our peoplo arc not forced by Prohibition to "drink wood alcohol. We have fewer cases of insanity in NewZealand in proportion to tho population, under Continuance than America has under Prohibition. All forms of serious crime are lessen-" ing in New Zealand under Continuance, while in America under Prohibition they have so increased that U.S.A. has "the murder record of tho world."

■ Why was Dr. Van dor Las so silent on tho facts, so roticent of the truth? Because he did not know. Lot us forgive his ignorance. The peoplo of New Zealand, however, know, and with that knowledge they have determined to vote Continuance on Election Day.—Advfc.