CORRESPONDENCE PROHIBITION.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XXXIII, Issue 3422, 14 December 1896, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE PROHIBITION.

f * V i yO tflK-BDITOR. ?Sfti,—SQ^J| Me going, ..about saying that probibraon would infringe on the liborty of thAworking man, but I contend that Vvery tyrannous kind of t prohibition exißtß already. A man must ] not distil a drop of whisky for hifflself and friends, rapt not brew a tuh^pf beet* porter or ale and sqll It — not even if he keep a dining-room «nd has fiito or one hundred sit down to dinner daily. Nine hundrtd and ninety-nine of us out of overy thousand are prohibited people; wo may not distil and sell, or brew and soil, but the one thousandth man is a Government pet and may sell to either working man or nabob at a terrific price so ns to ftftten dishonest Governments. I ' hflve^jwheai farming in England bought many scores of 9 and 18 gallon casks of excellent' beer, delivered, at one shilling per gallon, and very good Romfrra Pale Ale also at *ne shilling per gallon, and I have had4it harvest time 18-gaHon tubs of weak, but fresh, lively beer, delivered, at 6d'per gallon, and the stronger at one shilling, and my wife constantly brewed excellent beer that did not cost me more than one shilling a gallon. One shilling a gallon is three farthings per half pint, and mainly by selling portor and ale at one penny per glass, or per measured half pint "in the pewter," fortunes have been made in London, in the busy ports, in a few years. Here^ three glasses of beer a .fifty at the bar costs the working man £21 7s 6d a year ; in England three glasses of porter a day would oost him, at the bar, £4 11b Bd, and leave 25 or -more per cent, to the publican. What aorfc of liberty is it that licenses one man in a thousand to rob the working-man in that way ? At present there ore anti-prohibition men going about looking injured, talking about " liberty " and asking " What sort of ' liberty ' is it that allows a rich man to get a case of whiskey and asks his friends to his h.ouse to drink it, and at the same time refuses to let the poor man buy his glass of beer ?" I reply, 11 What sort of man is it who would get a case of whiskey and collect some topers to help to guzzle it away ?" I thought we were such a "sober colony." I would also ask, " What sort of liberty is it that allows one man in a thousand to distil or sell, but will not allow a poor woman to brew and sell a tub of beer or ale in her road-side cottage ftt one "penny per half pint and bo get a living 1" What sort of " liberty " is it that allows the one man in a thousand to sell ihree farthings' worth of beer to the poor man for sixpence, and sends the unlicensed man or woman who brews and sells it for a penny to prison ? It is the same kind of 'liberty" that makes the hotelkeepers' fortunes now that once made slaveowners' fortunes out of negroeß. But, because I say that the present licensing system is an iniquitous one, I do not advocate the sale of intoxicants. I think all intoxicating drinks are dangerous drinks. I shall feel much obliged if you will kindly insert the above.— Yours, etc., Thos. Drake.