POLITICS AND LIQUOR

Evening Star, Issue 18979, 29 June 1925, Page 2

POLITICS AND LIQUOR

TO THU EDITOR. Sir.- The silence, with which yon treat the main portion of my letter and Hie unexpected agreement you evinced with one of my question render my task easy in replying to your editorial of last evening.' There arc, however, certain contenlions made by you which require comment. Firs, yon say that many years ago a Now Zealand Parliament did act along democtalic lines when giving the people t-ho right to vote on the liquor question. Now yon may, and 1. am sure do, regard a stipulation calling for a three-fifths majority in favor of Prohibition as a necessity to il becoming law as democratic, but I am equally .sure that yon arc, outside of Fontinuaiieo supporters, practically alone in this belief. The same applies to the, third issue now on the ballot paper, or to the tornorate Control issue, which an endca vor is being made to have insert cdjn its place. If is, as you say, possible for Prohibit ion to be carried by a bare inajorily, but that majority must be, oyer two oilier issues combined —a very improbable and difficult feat. A our defence of Ihic method of vote counting in regard In (lie liquor question makes one wonder why you have never advocated the same, method, two parlies against one, in the parliamentary elections. H the hindrance to tho passing of the Prohibition law is necessary, ns you say, to prevent sudden and insufficiently-supported measures from being passed, (hen the same hindrance ought certainly to exist when the issue is probably the changing of tho destiny of a country by the predominance of one party over its rivals. To say tho prohibitionists are “inconsistent” when acting as yon do is really rich, and I would be glad to learn how yon justify such an opposite attitude in regard to the. two questions. Evidently you arc not prepaid! to conlend that justice '.nines into a deal by which 300,000 prolvbi--1 iotlists are forced to become, part-owners in a concern they have limes without number voted to abolish altogether, and which they detest. As you say, “ even minorities have rights,” but how yon believe this and at tho same time approve Corporate Control is a mystery. ’When you charge tho prohibitionists with regarding their particular reform as of ” caipreme importance,” and all others “ trivial,” von make a statement which is uni rue. The well-known and lamentable manner in which in the past prohibitionists have first voted Prohibition and then voted “wet.’ candidates into Parliament is proof of the strong political opinions held by them. Tim case seems'to have been in exact reverse to what you state; that political opinions were supreme and Prohibition trivial. However, since you agree that ;1 would he unwise for prohibitionists to vote a “wet” Parliament into power to draft and pass an enforcement law, there is no need to comment at greater length, since this is all we wish. As you say, theoretically it should not matter what Parliament was in power, since a good enforcement codo would be expected of any (iovrcnmi'iil; but tho absurd and unfair handicap? put in the way of the carrying of Prohibition, and the nnti-Proliibftion report presented last session, despite the evidence calling for abolition of Hie traffic, show clearly that only those pledged and known to be prohibitionists in sentiment can bo trusted: lionrc the cry for ‘‘ Prohibition before party.” The quotation of America docs not apply by comparison to New Zealand, as you say, and it would bo as well if your roach rs ranf.embcrcd- your words, since ! he, two countries arc, so often compared in regard to enforcement, etc.—l am, etc., LuiKirnr. June 26. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In reading your leader on Hie, ahovo I was wondering whether, since tho brewers and distillers merged into one gigantic combine, with their enormous capital, tho ‘Evening Star’ had joined the merger as commander-in-chief. You and all tho leading journalists know perfectly well that the trade lias defied all regulation and all control because it is absolutely nnregiilatnWn and uncontrollable. Nothing short of absolute national Prohibition will ever prevent drunkenness, crime, poverty, and the spread of V. I>. and cancer, which the liquor traffic is directly and indirectly in a largo measure responsible for. In tho ‘Spoils Special ’ a week or two ago there was a. brief paragraph that in Prohibition America 45 per cent, of tins workers own their own homes. Again in the ‘ Evening Star ’ a, night or two ago one of your reporters interviewed a gentleman just returned from America, who stated that tho workers were paid the highest waves and rendered the highest service. What else could you expect vßth drinking saloons closed, no pot-house politics, no alcoholic mantraps at the corner of tho street, while here, in God’s own country tho increase of drinking a monger young men and women first, offenders (soon to Ivcomo habitual drunkards) is causing grave anxiety '! And yet. influent ial papers lalk glibly about Corporate Control and Stalo Control. I well remember what the late .Mr T. E. Taylor told a, mass meeting of worker.-; at Christchurch years ago. He said it was an absolute certainl v that if tho people did not throttle Hie liquor traffic the liquor traffic would Ihroillc the people.— 1 am, etc., Padical. Juno 27. [“Liberty” .holds Prohibition io be such a, etii e-a!l of ills that everythin-- else !u government should lie subordinated lo it, and the stioug point of “ Radical ” j. that the liquor business can never be oihcrwisc controlled. Wc commend to both our correspondents perusal of an article on page 10 on the results of Hie Carlifdo experiment in .Statu C-uitrol. That experiment, lias been in progress now for more than half ;i dozen years, and its results arc much less disputed than those, of Prohibition in America. We won id point out to “Liberty 11 that political voting is not confined (o two parlies, despite other differences of opinion. A candidate may stand for any party and be e'ecled. yet the first necessity for a Government is that ii, shall command a majority of voles in tho Home. —led. P.S.]