LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 6 September 1929, Page 10

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

LIQUOR TRADE AND PUBLIC TRUSTEE. (By Telegraph —Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Sept. 5. Sir Robert Stout, in the Legislative Council to-day, moved: “That in the opinion, of the Council, considering the waste of food and means and the physical and moral injury to the people caused 'bv the consumption of alcoholic liquors, steps should be taken by tlie; Government to discourage such consumption and to pass such a law as will prevent the Public Trustee being a ibrewer or vendor of such liquor.” Sir Robert argued that the deleterious effects of alcohol on the human system could not be denied, and that if the League of Nations had seen fit to prohibit the use of liquor amongst the natives in West Africa there was an equal necessity for steps to be taken to save the lives of the people generally from the same evil. The motion was not intended as punishment for the Public Trustee, but to do him a service. He probably only con. sented to be a brewer because he thought it his duty to do something for the estates for which he was 1 trustee. It was absurd that while the Education and Health departments were .circulating literature advocating! temperance and pointing out the evils’ of drink the Public Trust Department was publishing advertisements telling the people to drink beer and stout because it was health-giving. The Leader of the iCouncil, the Hon. T. K. Sidey, said none of the liquor interests controlled by the Public Trustee belonged to the (State or the Public Trust Office. They belonged solely to. individuals for whom the Public Trustee was acting in the same capacity as any other trustee. He was bound to do his best in the interest's.of the beneficiaries for whom he was acting. That was within the scope of the law (which in New Zealand permitted both the brewing aiul vending of alcoholic liquors. Sir Robert Stout’s object would not be attained by preventing the Public Trustee from acting in that capacity in relation to such estates. The only thing that would be achieved if the moton’ were given effect to would be that all persons having controlling interests in liquor would not appoint the Public Trustee to administer their estates. It would only be a means of debarring people from getting the benefit of the Public 'Trust 'Office, and that would be unreasonable. The Hon. W. Earnshaw also opposed the motion, which was defeated by 23 votes to six. The Council adjourned at 3.50 p.m. until next Wednesday.