THE DRINK PROBLEM IN BRITAIN

Evening Star, Issue 16824, 28 August 1918, Page 7

THE DRINK PROBLEM IN BRITAIN

WHAT HAS BEEN DONE IN WAR TIME. striking"progress. Lord D'xVbernon, chairman of the Liquor Control Board, recently made, in an interview with a representative of the 'Observer,' an interesting statement with regard to the position and prosspects of the drink question in Britain. "We can claim in this country," he said, "to have made more rapid progress towards the solution of the drink problem than any country in the world. We can claim, further, to be on a more durable basis, because the restrictions imposed have not created any tendency among the to resort to drugs or worse alternatives." His Lordship drew a striking comparison between tho measures in force in this country and those in America for restricting the output of drink. Ho showed very clearly that we aro by no means behind tho tfnited States—in fact, in many cases the restrictions here aro more severe—and that American parents may rest assured that wo are in tho closest touch with their authorities in safeguarding their sons from danger. "The position of the drink problem hero and the control of the alcohol trade," His Lordship said, "have not been fully understood on the other side of the Atlantic. Some sections of opinion there appear to think that conditions prevailing in England to-day are similar to those which prevailed 'in 1914 and previous years. Nothing could be further from the truth.

"As regards tho measures in force, an examination of tho restrictions which prevail hero to-day will show that they are not only more severe in many points than those which prevail throughout the United States, but also that they have been at least as effective in diminishing intemperance. Full Prohibition throughout tho States cannot come into force beforo 1920. In the meantime different parts of the States are subject to varying regulations, and considerable difficulty is experienced on account of the innumerable frontiers between dry and wet States. You know the dangers" from such frontiers and their liability to create illicit traffic. FIGURES COMPARED. - "Let us compare existing conditions. As regards the manufacture of spirits for potable purposes, that has been stopped both here and in the United States. Consumption of old stocks is apparently allowed in the States without restriction, except in special Prohibition areas, whereas in the United Kingdom the quantity released from bond is restricted to 50 per cent, of the amount cleared in 1916, which had already been reduced far below the pre-war level. " With regard to beer, in tho United States the materials used have been reduced to about 70 per cent, of the prewar figures. Here they have been reduced to below 40 per cent. In the United States, under a new order which came into force at the beginning of the year, no malt liquor—except ale and portermay now be produced containing more than 2.75 per cent.,, alcohol by weight, equal to approximately 6 per cent, of proof spirit. This corresponds to a gravity of about 1038deg. In this country the average gravity ot all beers has been fall--ing rapidly in the last two years, and by the new order it has been reduced to lOoOdeg. " With regard to restrictions on sale, approximately 63 per cent, of the 100,000,000 "inhabitants of the United States live in Prohibition areas, and outside of these areas no war restrictions appear to have been imposed except as regards sales to soldiers. In the United Kingdom 38.C00.000 nut of 45,000,000 inhabitants—that is, 84 per cent.—live in areas under the Control Board regulations. THE TEST OF RESULTS.

"This means that in the non-Prohibition areas of the United States sale continues apparently on a pre-war basis, except as regards sales to troop*, whereas in the controlled areas of the United Kingdom it is only permitted under severe restrictions as to time of sale, shortened hours, and numerous other safeguards against temptations to excessive drinking." It will thus be seen that this country has certainly not been behind the United States in imposing restrictions framed to diminish intemperance and excess. Personally, I see no call for and no justification of any more severe measures than those in force. Indeed, I am convinced that greater severity in the past would have meant less progress and less efficiency. Had we gone further wo should In.ve achieved less. In itself there is nothing admirable in severity. Merit does not reside in restricting refreshment or recreation, but in preventing excess. It is by its results that any system must bo judrcd ; and the results- in our own caee. I have already indicated." NATIONAL EFFICIENCY.

Turning to the effect upon national efficiency of tho regulations in force, His Lordship said ; " I cannot do better than draw your attention to the extraordinary contrast between the tone of public debate here on this subject in 1915 and in 1918. In the spring of 1915 Mr Lloyd George, an passages of great eloquence and force. stated with general assent that ' drink is a greater enemy than either Germany or Austria,' and that 'drink is doing us more damage in the war than all tho German submarines put together.' During the last month two long debates have taken place in the House of Commons, tho first on the subject of Prohibition, the second on the subject of the. deficiency of shipping output. In neither of these debates did any speaker advocate Prohibition on tho ground that drunkenness was now interfering with national efficiency. This is a remarkable change, and app-ears to me to show conclusively that publio opinion recognises that the drink problem as regards national efficiency lias been solved. In his address at the City Temple on March 13 Mr Lloyd George himself dealt with the subject at considerable length, and while promising his hearers that if it came to a choice between beer and bread the Government would not hesistate, he made no mention of drink a 9 a cause of industrial difficulty.

" With regard to American soldiers and sailors here, all reports agree that their conduct has been exemplar}'. If there is any apprehension among American fathers and mothers regarding danger to their sons from, the very restricted conditions which obtain in this country respecting drink, they can rest assured that we are in close touch with the American authorities, and that any special action which they or the American Government might consider necessary will be carefully considered, and will be adopted if possible. Personally, however, I regard any apprehensions on this score as groundless, and as being an aspersion upon tho self-control of tho American trcops in this country, which they are very far indeed from deserving."