The Hastings Standard Published Daily TUESDAY, DEC. 14, 1897. PROHIBITION ORDERS.

Hastings Standard, Issue 501, 14 December 1897, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily

TUESDAY, DEC. 14, 1897. PROHIBITION ORDERS.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrongs that need resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that we can do.

On Monday we mentioned the fact that Native women were procuring liquor in Hastings as in other parts. The law preventing Native women from indulgences of this sort is quite a recent one. It was well-intended, no doubt, but it is novel in its way. It is a penal offence for a publican to supply liquor to a Native woman, but a dusky damsel who may be living with an European, and, consequently, is his wife, may demand liquor whenever she pleases. This is surely an anomaly. Then, again, it seems absurd that a female aboriginal should be debarred from partaking of the luxuries —if they may be so termed—of life, whilst her husband is given carte blanche in the matter. What is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. But there is a more serious aspect of the questiou. Publicans find it an utter impossibility to comply with the law in respect to Natives. Say, for instance, that a Native and his wife are staying at a hotel. The Native of the male persuasion may order a pint ot qyart of gin, and take it to his room. There, of course : he supplies the grog to his wife. What, in this case, is the publican to do? He has rendered himself liable, unwittingly, to prosecution. The Act, altogether, appears to be absurd. It is impossible to prohibit Native women from procuring drink, with the existing law. an European is prohibited from procuring liquor he is forbidden to enter a nublichouse. When, however, a Native woman is prohibited, she may enter a licensed house as she pleases. And this is where the contraveution of the law commences. Drink is supplied to Native women through their husbands, or friends, and the law cannot, or does not, interfere. This prohibition of Native women seems throughout; Jo have been a farce. It is a reflection upon the intelligence of our aboriginals. Before prohibition is brought about to affect Europeans, a poll has to be taken, but when the Native women are Oncerned tbeie is LP poll. It) is man-

datory. The law, in this case, is a " hass." There are Native women who go to extremes. There are European women who do likewise. If it is an offeuce for a publican to supply liquor to a Native woman, it should be an offence, also, to supply it to an European woman. But then the question of equality comes in. If a wife is refused liquor, why should a husband be permitted to obtain it'? New Zealand legislation appears to be about a century ahead of things.