THE H.B. TRIBUNE. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 4, 1918. THE LIQUOR REFERENDUM.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VIII, Issue 311, 4 December 1918, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 4, 1918. THE LIQUOR REFERENDUM.

“The House met at 2.30 p.m. Mr. Massey moved the second reading of the Licensing Amendment Bill. . . The bill was reported, with amendments, read the third time, and passed. The House rose at 12.35 a.m.” Thus, within the short space of ten hours, was brought into being a piece of legislation which is the offspring of not less than thrice as many years of agitated gestation m the womb of that anxious-minded body, the Prohibition Party. That under such circumstances of forced delivery it should be something of a mutilated deformity was only to be expected, and it may well be doubted whether its existence is going to serve any useful puiposr However, the people were promised something in the way of legislation on the Liquor question, and now they have it —thrown to them, as a bone to a hungry dog, as the result of a keen desire on the part of a section of the people to take ad- ; vantage of war conditions in order ■ to further a pet theory of social reformation. So far no copy of the | bill has reached qar hands, but we * are able to-day to publish a fairly 'full synopsis ot it taken from a Wel- ] lington contemporary, where alone, we believe, the measure was made available tor press criticism before it was rushed through the Lowei House. The core ot the bifl. ot course, consists of the issues that are to be put before the people ot the Dominion for their decision by way of a plebiscite, or possibly ot two such popular votes. N ext March or April they are to be asked to say whether matters are to remain as they are or whether the liquor trade is to be abolished, as from the end of Juno next, on the basis of paying to those interested in it compensation for their Joss, the aggregate sum to be so paid being limited to four and a-half million pounds. Should abolition not bo cai tied on the first referendum, then another is to be taken at the time ol the next general election—definitely promised tor December of next year -when three issues will be submitted to the vote, viz : (1) Continuance as at present, (2) State Purchase and Control, and (3) Prohibition without compensation. On the first referendum the issue will be decided by a bare majority of the votes cast, this being a concession to the Prohibition Party, which has so long strenuously protested against the threefilth's majority hitherto necessary for carrying either local or national prohibition without compensation. On the other hand that party has so far temporised with Satan as to forgo its set policy of insisting on prohibition without compensation; one of its many pamphleteers salving his conscience by adding, by way of menace to “the Trade,” “for this occasion only.” The abstract of the bill to be found on another page of this issty?- shows who arc to participate in this compensation and how it is to be assessed. From the Press Association report of such hasty discussion of the bill as was permitted we gather that, should the aggregate amount of compensation as assessed exceed the limit of 4l millions, then .each item will have to he reduced pro rata so as to bring the total within that amount—which would involve a nice little sum in proportion. How, having accepted the principle of compensation, the House reconciled itself to placing a limit upon the amount, apparently , without any data excepting some ac- ; countancy estimate announced by ’ the Prime Minister, without details, ; it is difficult to say. However, the amendment in this direction seems ■ to have commended itself readily to i the House, for it is reported as having been carried “on the voices.” j As has been said, the second plebiscite, on the three issues set out above, is to be taken only if the first fails to induce a majority in favour of prohibition. Moreover, on it a majority of the total votes cast is required to carry either of ' the issues involving change from the : present licensing law. Then, again, . between now and the time set for its taking there will be another • session of Parliament, at which we may confidently expect that the : liquor question if not by then settled ;in favour of prohibition, will again 'be made the subject of further dis- ' mission. For the present, therefore, j there is little need to discuss the prospects of the plebiscite proposed | for the end of next year. With ■ regard to those of the earlier poll, the ease with which the bill seems Ho have gone through the House, jwith no apparent concerted effort on, Ithe part of the friends of the Trade ■ to balk it, is capable of either of itwo very diverse interpretations. Either tlie brewers and their party feel fairly confident of a majority, or else they are so afraid of a possible ultimate majority in favour of t prohibition without compensation jthat they are prepared to risk the i lesser evil. A thiTd possible explanation suggests itself at the moment, that some of the. big men in the Trade, or one at least, probably the biggest of the monopolists, may" be wishful to cut adrift from the business and its associations, and be glad of the opportunity to ; get out on terms involving little, it ‘ any, loss. However, the first sug--1 gestion made is more probably the 1 correct one. In coming to this con- ! elusion we are giving considerable \ weight to the influence which the i feature of compensation will have . upon the average voter. As has I been said, the Prohibitionists as a i party have swallowed the unpalat--1 able pill of compensation, and their i avowed adherents will doubtless 1 vote accordingly. But the men and ’ women, and there are many of them, ' who have hitherto voted for pro- ’ hibition mainly as a protest against the present monopilistic conditions under which the trade is conducted ; will hesitate about carrying their dislike of it so far as to saddle themselves and the.rest of the community with the burden of the furher taxation necessary to provide interest anti sinking fund on the amount rhat will have to be bor- ■ rowed. The limitation of the total > amount of compensation is no doubt

an element in favour of the abolitionists, but, even with that unexpected advantage thrown in, it mav well be doubted whether they will be able to command eyen the bare majority which alone is now demanded. We do not think that the Prohibition Party has any conception how much the substantial numbers they have on _ occasion polled in favour of the extinction of the liquor traffic depended upon those who were, and still are, merely disgusted with present conditions. However, another four months or so will in all probability convince them of this when these .uncoloured protestants are faced with the question of compensation.