Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5th, 1911. THE LICENSING QUESTION.

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 December 1911, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE TUESDAY, DECEMBER sth, 1911. THE LICENSING QUESTION.

The questions to be decided by the referendum to be taken on the'licensing problem on Thursday next, are of such vital importance to every member of the community, that it is the

bounderi duty of the electors 'to give the subject careful and mature consideration before recording their votes on the proposals submitted for their decision. Not only will be people be called upon to vote on the local option issue, but they will also be asked to determine, for the first time, whether or not the experiment of National Prohibition shall be tried, in this Do.- j minion. We use the term “experi-j ment” advisedly, for the proposal is j in every respect a risky idea fraught 1 with grave consequences to the people i as a whole. During the past few | weeks, we irave been treated to a slit- | feit of literature pro and con, but it is j remarkable to not© that some of the ’ more important phases of this vcxeu problem have been entirely overlooked. Firstly, we must consider the effect which National Prohibition would have were it to receive the three-fifths majority necessary to. give it legal effect in this Dominion. The Act is clear and explicit on the subject. On Prohibition coming into force, not, only will all licenses and club charters to sell liquor be abolished, but it will be an offence for any person to import into New Zealand, or to manufacture, sell, or have in his possession for purposes of sale, intoxicating liquor of any description. The only exception is in favour of intoxicating liquor for medicinal, scientific, sacramental, or industrial purposes that may be imported or manufactured under regulations made by the Governor-in-Council. According to an opinion given by Mr. Martin Chapman, K.C., of Wellington, even a person who Ventured to make a little home-brewed beer or gooseberry wine for his own consumption, would be liable to a fine of £IOO for the first offence, and three months’ imprisonment in the case of a second, or any subsequent offence. The provisions, it will he seen, are drastic in the extreme. In a nutshell Prohibition theoretically means “no liquor.” But in practice what would be the result ? National Prohibition would bring into existence a state of affairs infinitely worse than what could possibly obtain under the legalised and pro]>er control ■of the sale of alcoholic .liquors. Sly grog shops would spring into existence all over the .country and the liquor which they would sell would be the deadly product of the illicit still. Smuggling of liquor into the country from outside would be another evil which would follow in the train of National Prohibition. What occured in Maine (now very unpopular with our prohibitionist friends) would be enacted in New Zealand. The abolition of the sale of liquor would be marked by the introduction of all vices which emanate from a desire to ■secretly evade the law, while we need hardly point out that hypocrisy and fanaticism would go hand in hand. There is also another cogent reason Avhy the electors should not permit the realisation of the Prohibitionist dream. The liberty of the subject would be infringed in a most unwarrantable and tyrannical manner. President Lincoln, the man who abolished slavery in America, put the position in these telling words: — “Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for if goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation, and in making crimes out of tilings that are not crime. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principle on which our governments are founded”. The electors' should also remember that if National Prohibition is once carried licenses cannot be restored until six years have elapsed.. The remarks in reference to the National poll apply with equal cogency to the local No-license issue. No-License, it is claimed, would lessen the amount of drinking. This, however, is a pur,© hallucination, as, despite the fact that there _ are now thirteen no-license districts in the Dominion, the drink hill has steadily increased per head of population. And this drinking is not confined to the licensed areas alone. The frequent convictions for sly grog selling, especially in Ashburton and Invercargill, unerringly indicate that drinking of a specially objectionable type goes on in these districts. No-License has not, nor will it ever, lessen the amount of drinking! throughout New Zealand. Only by moral suasion will true temperance be promoted. We strongly advise the electors to vote on the proposals in such a way that a clean, well-regulated trade will be maintained.