10 THE EDITOR.

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 118, 14 November 1925, Page 13

10 THE EDITOR.

Sir,—l have before me your sub-lead-er on the above subject, and have held over a reply hoping that more complete figures might have come to hand. Your article, to say the (least of it, is very regrettable. It Bets out with the distinct object of discouraging genuine reform and reformers'; and, as far as I can remember, during the .whole period in which the licensing question has been submitted to the popular vote your leading columns have been a bar to .progress. Is it not a fact that all'reforms co far accomplished have come '.'off the bat" of the party you delight to pick at? Among ' others", ~ abolition of barmaids, illegality of sale to lads under 21, Sunday and 6 o'clock closing. This latter, it was prophesied, would bring in its train all kinds of trouble, financial ruin, bootlegging, and' sly-grog selling, etc. ; but almost all those who opposed this measure (including the publicans themselves) agree that it has been an untold blessing. Referring to your percentages, you again show marked unfairness, as the 1911 poll was taken on a totally different basis, as. the No-License issue was in the paper, and State Control was not, and no two issues were added together. All polls taken since that date hava resulted in a vote reaching within one and a fraction per cent, of victory for Prohibition, despite the extra unfair handicap of State Control. .The heading of the article, "Another Prohibition Setback/ 1 ' betrays your studied hostility, aa the Prohibition vote to date is larger than the previous one, whilst the Continuance vote is very much smaller. This does not display a fair attitude. You may claim the right to; add the State Control vote in making up: your total, but only prejudice would claim such a right.. State Control is a protest that the Continuance system is unsatisfactory, and many of these, votesj if it were a direct "yes" or "no,", would be arrayed on the Prohibition side; This is not supposition,' as it was shown in Australia when v a preferential .vote was allowed. If the principle is.' right in your idea, why not apply it to the political issue, and in a three-cornered, contest add the votes of the two lower candidates together, and oust- the top candidate, and declare the second' on the list telected. "Absurd," you say; yes, it is absurd; but that is the way the Prohibition issue is robbed of its 1 rights.'- What • a howl- there would be, if Continuance had the tyiggest' total, and' State Control were added, to the Prohibition vote (as both these issues are not satisfied with Continuance)., and Continuance was' defeated! You.talk glibly about reform, but how much reform has the Moderate League ever done, or any other • liquor, organisation, or the newspapers, for that. matter* You sing the praises -of State. Control and gloat over the increase of a few votes, but. the total State Control vote is only 8 per cent, whilst the Prohibition issue polled 48 per cent, . r The smallest .issue ;. only ■■' owes... its:; ■ in-, crease to the" irtct that' the "major"' issues ignored it, and omitted to remind the electors that the State purchase clause would cost the country approximately 15 million sterling. This alone, if widely circulated, would' have "cold-douched" the' enthusiasm of the State Controllers, and left them no better numerically than previous polls. The Prohibition Party does not ask for "favours";, it; merely asks for- "justice," which is denied.—l am, etc.,

HORACE CHISHOLM.

13th November.

[The correspondent discloses such bia.3 that his letter would be unworthy of notice except for the gross errors in what he states as facts. V)ur subleader did not set out "with the distinct object of discouraging genuine reform," and unprejudiced readers of "The Post" will admit that we have always encouraged reform, while opposing abolition. Our percentage figures are unchallengeable. The-No-License: issue...was not in the voting paper in 1911, but was submitted as a distinct issue. We agree with the correspondent that his suggested analogy in the political ballot is. absurd. A choice of persons cannot compare ■ with the choice of an issue which would effect a revolutionary change in established customs. The correspondent has outdone himself in misrepresentation when he ' writes: "You sinj the praises of State Control and gloat over the increase of a few votes." Our only reference- was as follows:—"There is. one other pointto he noted in this year's referendum, and that is the increased vote for State Purchase and Control.' We believe this to be the expression of;a desire for reform." When ■ this is described as "gloating" and "singing the praises of State Control," we leave our' readers to judge what weight 1 may be to the correspondent's facts and opinions; We-believe that the State Control vote was, as we said, the.expression of a desire for reform, because it was widely urged upon electors that they should adopt. tl)is method of. indicating their wish for, reformative legislation.—Ed.] ■ ■ ■■"■■• -.