POLAND'S LIQUOR LAW.

Evening Star, Issue 20994, 7 January 1932, Page 8

POLAND'S LIQUOR LAW.

Finland lias taken a decisive stop. Having iuul twelve years of experience under a Prohibition law, the country lias decided that it shall bo discarded. The issue was not left to the dubious methods of politicians, for, as in the United States, it was no doubt realised that further legislative attempts at law enforcement would bo futile. Consequently a referendum was taken, and this test resulted overwhelmingly in favour of a return to liquor licenses. Accepting the verdict, the Government is preparing a Bill to abolish Prohibition forthwith. The Finns, because of the geographical position of their country, are remote from the world’s activities. What publicity has come to them of late years has been chiefly due to success in one branch of athletics. The name of Nurmi will bo familiar to most readers. But in Finland itself the Prohibition question has aroused the keenest interest. Dissatisfaction with the position grew to impatience, till at last the popular clamour could no longer be denied and the Government decided to hold a referendum. The question of enforcement, as in the United States, was the crucial test of the Prohibition system, and it is clear that the enforcement measures definitely failed. Rum running developed into a most profitable occupation, notwithstanding the efforts of the Finnish coastguard. To give an idea of the extent of the illegal operations in this direction, during the first nine months of 1931 over 300,000 quarts of alcohol and over a hundred motor boats and other craft were confiscated. Finland’s neighbour, Estonia, came into prominence in this connection. Sensational charges were made in the Estonian Parliament concerning the illegal exports of strong drink, in which it was declared that one company engaged in rum running had been definitely aided by the Estonian coastguard in its business, and that other well-known smugglers had been assisted in the traffic while rival liquor exporters had been prevented from moving freely within Estonia’s territorial waters. Professor Virkkunen, a temperance enthusiast and a former member of the Finnish Cabinet, in a public address, declared, among other things, that “ Prohibition in its present form has no future whatsoever,” and that “ circumstances will bring about its collapse, probably very shortly.” That well-known New York journal, the ‘ Literary Digest,’ last month sought information as to the attitude of the Finnish Press on the position, and among the replies cabled we find these illuminating sentences from different journals: “The national situation has deteriorated into a perpetual struggle around Prohibition, and it is therefore necessary to appeal to the nation to ascertain whether the popular will for temperance has weakened.” “ The Cabinet must face the facts. Will the nation allow rum runners to make fortunes while the nation is threatened with economic collapse?” “The nation must conquer its conceited idea that Prohibition is a step towards temperance.” “ Finland’s problems and difficulties arising from the liquor situation have been very similar to those in the United States.” In no single case, among the messages quoted, is there a declaration in support of Prohibition. Perhaps the most striking comment on the position, however, will bo found in an address by the Association of Judges in Finland recently sent to the Government, in which it was declared that the enforcement of the Prohibition law found no support in the nation’s judicial conscience, that the law was violated by wide circles, that the supply and consumption of intoxicants had largely increased during the existence of Prohibition, and that the excessive use of intoxicants was endangering the country’s moral and physical future. These points, all bearing on enforcement, are the acid test of the Prohibition system, and the grave indictment of the judges no doubt powerfully influenced the voting when the referendum was taken. The Prohibition movement arose in Victorian days. It has been prosecuted vigorously in various countries. In some places it has been tried. Finland affords a fair example of its operation, and, as lias been pointed out, the United States is confronted with problems and difficulties of the same kind. It would bo interesting to know how many of America’s 130 millions of people, in defiance of the law, are engaged in rum running, bootlegging, and other branches of the illicit liquor traffic.