NO-LICENSE AND THE DRINK BILL.

Evening Star, Issue 14519, 20 March 1911, Page 3

NO-LICENSE AND THE DRINK BILL.

TO TUE EDITOR. Sir, —Your correspondent AVm. Aitcheson is making a gieat to do about a very simple matter. There is no doubt at all about No-lieenso reducing tho drink bill in tho No-license areas themselves. The figures showing the consumption of drink in those areas proved that it was from one-fifth to one-seventh of the average for New Zealand. Thus, even if a groat deal is allowed for smuggling and for liquor carried in in quantities too small to need registering, it is still certain that the quantity consumed in No-license areas is only onethird or less of the average for New Zealand. Mr Aitclieson makes some sweeping remarks as to those who vote No-license, but do not themselves stop drinking. It always seems to me that this is a perfectly logical position. "A " says: "I will voto No-hccnso for tho sako of l B,' or ' for the general good,' hut I do not choose to stop my drinking until such time as I iiavo to." Though it would be better for " A " to become an abstainer also at the same time as he votes No-license, lie is coming halfway in saying by Ids vote: " When tho rest give it up I am willing to givo it up also." The drink bill went down 4s 5d per head in 1909, but as trade was dull in that year, that was no doubt partly the cause. Last year it only went up 2s Id per head, so it is still L's 4d per head below what it was in IDOB. Our spending capacity in New Zealand is far greater than many places that have a much higher drink bill, and I think the No-license party and temperance workers generally are doing good work in keeping it as low as it is. Dominion Prohibition is what is wanted to get at the root of the drink evil. To get Dominion Prohibition quickly we must all, however, vote local No-license too.—l am, etc., Social Student. March 18.