OUR READERS' OPINIONS.

Gisborne Times, Volume L, Issue 5136, 31 March 1919, Page 7

OUR READERS' OPINIONS.

THE LIQUOR QUESTION. (To the Editor)Sir, —Mr. Lysnar in to-day’s paper says that in my wire to Sir Jas. Allen I have absolutely misinterpreted and misconstrued liis remarks. Looking up yoitr report of the meeting an Thursday’s isfeue, this is what Air. Lysnar said —‘‘He had been told by. one soldier that 90 per cent- °f tljS soldiers-'were in favojNpf Ji®ior, ai» over ,:40,000 soldieriulware away the PjOminion/tdf.'daT, ®ndJpijd# I*% provisions of fh® w could vote. V; \|f £•?!#. 5 ‘ A-~voi<&: W<| ilpesßpnjublc? Mr. Lyhnar:\|oiM m/mber and the Governmintj; fApplause.) The question |fs— Are we going to stand i\r \ £ . Voices: Noinf), and applause. In to-day’ s\i|sue. Mr Lysnar sayfi that he never said this; so Opt your i reporter must as IM. a/ 1 . 1 ' 1 ’ as I am. I leave l/e)mfilter tfr the sense of the audience sav #iether he said it or not. Jjl be at all surprised to p_e Wt Lysnar tell me my name is White and not Black. -I am, *»>»•§•.,_ bj , AC K-** PROHIBITION AND SLY GROG. (To the Editor). Sir, —Whenever the prohibitionist is reminded that the closing of hotels will mean an increase of sly grog he replies that under prohibition sly grog will be shut out because there will be no place from which the sly grog merchant will be able to replenish supplies. - , , That sounds plausible enough, but experience shows that the attempted suppression of drink is at best only a temporary .expedient. Sly grog is bad enough—tlia#* is .merely illicit trading. /Prohibit thanking altogether, and/you wfll h||ae a still more dangerous: malady‘"Til the immediate creation W an illicit manufacture. The United States Commissioner _of Internal Revenue reports that during 1917-18, 3376 illicit stills were seized, and more than three-fourths of these were located in five prohibition States. Sn another report the §&me officer describes lii Sr force as JJeing unable/®) com wiju moon shin in g, ” said* wM I’d^Spant^especially in Jthe pjofdoi tjibnf distraEts, and m ~his L ionehmij# seni*ncc^Rays: ‘‘l doi'dfcTEFknotvf grany -hftjiSSffel that offers sjf g;-ea|Jn profit with so small <4 ris W as does 5 the making of contral>4ndfTiquQr.,, With the abolition of the licensed hotel, the illicit still, producing an awful concoction, dangerous to drink and productive of grave consequences to the mental and physical health of the community, will become an established institution. It is absurd to suggest that the law will be able to cope with the defiance of prohibition, just as it deals with those who perpetrate other crimes. The difference between laws against drinking and those which punish the burglar and the thief is the absence of any popular sentiment behind liquor legislation. People see no harm in drinking in moderation. They are only gratifying a natural appetite. And as long as that idea prevails, the absolute suppression of drinking is only thg chimera of a. disordered brain.— I am, yours, etc MODERATION.***

THE IPSE DIXIT OF MR HAWES

(To the Editor). Sir, —On reading your Ts?ue of March 19 I see that Mr Hawes, in a letter, with his usual generosity offers some sound “advice to fellowworkers.” Well, Sir, I have refrained from making any comments on the effusion of Mr Hawes, (hoping that someone, who might prehaps be more conversant with the economic problems of the “Labor movement” of the day, would come forward and deal with'the. several arguments _ adl- - by Mr Hawes. But since none of them has come to light, I hope, Sir. that you will give my humble self some of your valuable space in order that I may try and deal somewhat with him. In the first place, he seems to take exception to the formation of “one large federation of labor,” and he says that he will endeavor to point out the fallacy of such an undertaking, and that such a step would be of no benefit to the “working class.” Still; in the same breath, he says that he is not “antagonistic to unionism,” and that he. himself has been a member of a union and held office in that union. But the point that seems to upset Mr Hawes is, “the federation of unions. Now, Sir, it seems obvious that Mr Hawes,like many others, has cast on tne shell of the chrysalis of the employee, and taken to the wings of the moth of the employer—simply a transition from the bench to the boss. I am not finding any faub with that, for the opportunity presented itself ana Mr Hawes seized it, hut assumin , that Mr Hawen was once a unionist and had this great movement been inaugurated in his time, I presume that Mr Hawes, would have accepted it with a certain amount of satisiaction simplv because he makes use o the term “union is strength. } , he makes use of a simile, which is not only absurd, but silly m the extreme. I refer to. the servants ah his imaginary restaurant, for such an event could not y ta e place an for any servant having a disagreement with hisor h er employer, and leaving the job. could bring out the “whole of the federation of labor” on strike. Surely, Sn, Mr Hawes is only trying ■ to bring contumely on the movement, by r ing such an absurdity. Ana 11 Mr Hawes was ever a member of a union, he must know that such a thing as bringing out ,on strike the whole of a community, because of a rumpus 'in <i rel3taiirant, S tesquelv absurd. , „ Mr Hawes does not favor the amalgamation of labor unions, I woum like to ask him if be is m favor of the amalgamation" of the emoloyerS union, who hold their conned unegings annually, and appoint their of fleers throughout the Homimon.-aud are in agreement, with their fellow councils hold, in the Commonwealth nf Australia? \ Or. is he of, the

huge “trusts and combines” amalgamating Or is lie in favor 'of the several banking institutions amalgamating? It would appear that Mr Hawes has pictured to himself, that once the several “trades unions” federate, that it will, as he puts it, “bring about the fall of Governments.” Now, Sir, surely Mip Hawep must be drawing somewhat on his imagination, when he makes such a bold assertion? I will ask Mr Hawes this —Does he consider that the business of any country could possibly be carried on without an executive or Government ?

A Now he comes to the Bolsheviki. ■'Well, it seems that all one has to do is to just mention that name to Air Hawes, and it is like holding a “’red rag to a bull.” Well, now, as to the Bolsheviki. Who made him? If Air Hawes, or any other person wants to know what brought the Bolsheviki into existence, read the “Black Book of' Russia,” and then it will be as clear as noonday. Now, as to liis “soap-box” orators. I would like Air. Hawes to wake up to the fact, anyhow such as we are continually being told, that we are living in “the first country under the sun,” and many of those “orators,” as he dtubs them, have something to tell the public, and they are not able to afford to hire a hall: hence the use of the “soap-box,” and no long as they do not abuse other people, or Cause any disturbance, or any breach of the peace, I have a perfect confidence in the police and respect to all kinds of street lectures and their liberty. Now, as to skilled workers,’- and restaurant workers, it is this. We are all worker’s, both skilled and unskilled. We have all got mouths to feed, families to feed, clothe and educate. rent to pay, furniture to buy, clothes to Buy, doctors to pay, newspapers and libraries, and so forth. So in that respect we are on the same level, and we require a fair amount of income tp do it with. We want to abolish the “sweat system,” and we don’t want “Hood’s Song of the Shirt” days to come back again, and what al] unions are aiming is “a fair dav’s pay for a fair day’s work.” I should like'to ask Mr. Hawes, what he sees in calling those street lecturers “parasites and syncophants. ” I know many of those men who lecture on the street to be hard working and industrious men, living on their own earnings and not like some others who “live on the labor of others.” I very much fear that the advice that Mr Hawes has been kind to give us gratis has come rather late in the day. for -some of the presk of Australia Ims already tola us time and again “That the dav of Democracy is at hand. ■’ “and that nothing can stop the avalanche that is sweeping on.” Air Hawes says, in conclusion. that he claims to have passed through most phases of life and he can claim to be some authority on the subject, and I W'esurne most of ns are acquainted with the old Scotch proverb—

“When the Devil was ill. The Devil a saint would be But when the Devil got well The devil a saint was he. '

I am. vours etc.. NON-BOLSHEVIK