Canadian Clergymen Condemn Prohibition and Praise State Control

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVIII, Issue 10735, 5 November 1928, Page 6

Canadian Clergymen Condemn Prohibition and Praise State Control

Canada gave an extended trial to Prohibition, hat has now abandoned it in favor of State Control. The first province to adopt .State Control was Quebec, and the results were so satisfactory that province after province lias followed tho example, and to-day, only the two small districts of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island are under prohibitory laws. Seeking the reason for this remarkable demonstration of public feeling against Prohibition, the New Zealand Licensing Reform Association wrote to leading citizens of Canada, and tho replies received from leaders of public thought in all walks of life indicate that Prohibition was found to bo such a tragic mistake that it has Iteen banished for ever from our sister British Dominion. Among the many replies condemning Prohibition, and praising State Control, are a number from leading Churchmen, of which tho following are typical examples:— Copy of LeOer from the Most Bever, end David Williams, Art'glicari Archbishop, Diocese ,or Huron, and Metropolitan oD^ntario. b The Archbishop’s Bloom, Bishop London, Canada, MWIB, 1928. The Doimrmon Secretary, Licensing Jr Reform Association. ✓Dear Mr. Armstrong, Your letter of April 24 received, and in reply, let me say:— (Government Control,) 1. The moral effect has been altogeth- ■ loved the ternpges for the evn■oung people no ‘smart” to have parties—a eusire, Prohibition appily passing e is nothing what everybody at it. :lge, the general ed. There.have ons for drunkenness. Though the number of motors, both local and tourist, lni3 been nearly doubled in this province, .the cases of drunken drivers has been actually less than under Prohibition* 3. For man./ years public drunkenness lias not been characteristic of the peop’jTof this province. Public opinion regards it as a disgrace, and our Captains of Industry insist on sobriety in their workmen. The incuKtfb during Prohibition was prnpubft- due to poisonous liquors from fboot-leggers. It is a rare thin/now to see a drunken man on rjnr streets. 4. I have n|f means of knowing how the healgu of the community lias been affected. 5. There is® a revival of trade going on at the present time; but this was coming in any ease, and pro 1 V ably is not due to the change from Prohibition. Tho peoplGjLro conten tedagud happy. j, m G. The moderate jssers Mvo isfiedjfwith Stjcc Cqotroff 7. The people wjfb dflsire a retti vm oiL RpTighi tioiffn.rejtfriiieip’a 1 ly ' MeiJSodfeWj’.Svith J|'hqm*it'.is alum.™ an ajrtiffle ofMLiyr. xfe? great '' majority jjf Dio jjKdpm wtmt no reI am, of Jtourso. greatly interested in your mjtliod of dealing with the Liquon&Pjafblein. We, in Ontario, have trWST all three of the methods' you mention, and I have no hesitation in saying that State Controf is the best. The other two bad. Tho only question is, which Jn them is the worst? Private Ownership tends to encourage _ d/unkenness, which is bad. Prohibßmm tends to encourage hootleggiiiarand the drug habit, and so tp demoralise the young, to irritate the-JJw-abiding, and to create a generajr disrespect for law, all of wliieli/re bad. I might add that proviinee in Canada, one, tried Probibit:on, ajn witliin ton years, every one ahandtmed it in favor of Government. (Control. The one exception adopted Government Control instead of Prohibition. Now, Government Control is practically universal in'this Dominion, and to the best of my knowledge, tin* people as a wholo are satisfied with it. .

Believe me, Youra faithfully, (Sgd ) DAVID HURON

Copy of Letter from Vep. A. E. Burgett. M.A., Archdeacon of Edmonton North, Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. f , May 24, 1925. Dear Sir, —In reply to your questions of April 24 1 beg to state as follows: The substitution of State Control for Prohibition in Alberta has been followed by excellent results. Under Prohibition there was lawlessness. and it led to much drinking of “bootleg” whisky and intemperance. Since State Control was established T hardly ever see a drunken man. State Control has had a good moral effect. 2. Under Prohibition the young people were taking to drinking to an alarming extent, wldeh led to other and worse vices. Public dances of all kinds were the scene of drinking by both sexes. It was due to the complete failure of Prohibition that the Province threw it out—the country and towns showing an immense majority for State Control in every part of the Province h. Pub’ic drunkenness has decreased under State Control. 4. Tlie health of the community has improved under State Control, o. Things are decidedly better under State Control. 6. Yes, the moderate users of alcohol are satisfied with quality of liquors and method of supply- Before, no one knew whalt he was getting and vile poison was the cause of many "deaths and much sickness. . 7. No. Just a few fanatics desire to return, but the country -as a who’e is strongly against Prohibition, and I neither see nor hear any signs of a •wish to go back to Prohibition. Private ownership was abused. Prohilvtion was a complete failure. State Control is a decided success. Yours, truly, A. E. BURGETT, . (Archdeacon). As the people of'New Zealand will have the opportunity, of declaring, for a middle course between the extremes of prohibition and continuance of existing conditions, at the approaching poll, tho foregoing testimony should influence those desirous of securing real temperance reform to cast their votes fo.r the middle issue of SLSe Purchase and Control-*-.*