THE COMING POLL

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXXIV, Issue LXXIV, 8 April 1919, Page 5

THE COMING POLL

SIR JAMES ALLEN'S VIEWS. ) — ■ ■ j Following is a copy of a letter from bir James Allen to his constituentsT ™ Wellington, April 2, 1919. J. B Mcßinlay, Esq., Lawrence: D. Oemente, Esq., Kaitangata; and" W. Moore, Esq., Milton. Bear Mr Moore,—The issue to be decided on the 10th of this month is so important that I feel compelled to place before you my views on the liquor question, arrived at after many years of public life, and especially owing to experiences since the war began. I do I not write as a member of the Government, but as a citizen who is entitled *<> give expression to his opinions, in the hope that good may result. There are two argument® used in favor of the continuance of the liquor traffic: (1) Loss of Customs revenue. <2) Interference with the liberty of the individual. I have no anxiety about the revenue me Customs revenue from alcoholic liquor and beer during the last ten ye..is has averaged £867,696 per an?Un^^'o the J ear 1918 ft amounted to ±,»10,828. There are several sources from which to make this good: (a) Customs revenue from dutiable gowls imported in large quantities owing to the expenditure of an additional four or five millions, and probably more, that was previously spent on liquor, being diverted to oth e r channels, (b) Additional revenue from incomes, which will be greater . because of increased earnings, due to greater efficiency, and an expenditure of a large ! sum of money now spent on liquor. . I Prom a personal knowledge of the coal industry, I am in a position to state that after pay day there is. a falling-off in production. I am inform- ' ed that this is true of other industries also, (c) Taxation. The sources of revenue indicated in (a) and (b) will, in my opinion, be ample to meet the loss of Customs revenue from liquor. Interference with liberty appears to j be the chief argument used by those in favor of the continuance of the use of intoxicating liquor. There are many who enjoy a glass of wine, and probably more who prize the liberty to do as they like within the bounds of the law. I myeelr can enjoy a glass of wine, and the liberty which the law allows is dear to me, but I am willing to give up a pleasure and part with a portion of my freedom in order to remove from, my fellow man a temptation which he cannot resist and which isi a menace to him. •' The evidence which appeals to me is: (1) The evil effects on those who indulge and the ruination in many cases of family life. It is not my purpose to comment on the general evil effects, which, are apparent, but there are sad stories jvhich the public do not know of. During the war it has been my duty to deal with separation allowances to waves, and especially to wives living away from their husbands. In many cases drink was the cause of the break-up of the homes. By way of contrast I draw a comparison from my own experience. Some years ago certain coal miners moved to a no-license district to take up farming. ' When visiting the district .a tfew years later I had a meal at the home of one of these men. Round the table sat a happy family. The district was somewhat isolated, and 1 asked the wife if she felt lonely and j whether she did not at times wish to | be back at her old home. Her reply I was: "There is no Puke here." "Puke" j. was the shortened name of the hotel near the coal mine from which the J family had moved. It needs little imagination to understand the full. meaning of the wife's answer. I (2) The menace to some of the returned soldiers, both fit and medically unfit. It is unfair to discriminate between | soldier and civilian. The closing ci: j hotel jbars when, a transport arrives i alongside the wharf and six o'clock closing apply to soldier and civSTa'n alike. Will any civilian argue- that he is not prepared to put up with these i curtailments of his liberty in the in- i terests of soldiers and their kith and j kin? These" curtailments of the per-I I sonal liberty of soldier and civilian i I have not in many cases prevented the j supply of too much liquor to returned ; men. No one with eyes to see can | deny this. So-called friends, not real friends, of the soldier have found • means to evade the regulations and the Act, the result often being heartrending. Affection and time will, it is hoped, repair the sad hearts, but is! there not a clear call to prevent such, I things in the future even if it does demand some sacrifice.? Necessity did, however, demand some discrimination, which has taken the form of regula.tions to prevent the supply of Hquor to troop trains and to the sick and wounded whilst undergoing hospital treatment. Under the present law this >discrimination could not be avoided. On April 10 there will be an opportunity to get rid of the discrimination, .and to make effective the regulations which were devised to protect the soldier .and to assist th© sick and wounded to speedy and more certain recovery. (3) Immorality and venereal disease. I do not desire to comment on. these unsavoury subjects myself. A British Royal Commission not long ago reported on venereal disease, and I quote lrom the final report: "The relation 'between alcohol and venereal disease. Abundant evidence was given as to the intimate relation between alcohol and v«nereal disease*. Aleoho 1 renders a man liable to yield .to teruptations which he might otherwise resist, and aggravates the disease ! by diminishing the resistance of the j individual. ... "The facts point to the conclusion that decrease in the use of alcohol wiU .fee an important factor in diminishing the prevalence of venereal disease. ... General conclusion© (page 65): kOur evidence tends to show that the .communication of disease is frequently due to indulgence in intoxicants'* and there is no doubt that the growth of temperance among the population would help to bring about an amelioration of the wery serious conditions which our enquiry has revealed." (4) National Eisciency.—This aspect of the question has been fully discussed^ and nothang further need be added except to ask the questions: "Why have America and Canada come dry?" The answer, it appears to me, must .he "For national efficiency." Can a wet country successfully compete against a dry .one? My answer is "No." JSo one has suggested to me that 1 should write this letter. It has been sent <>n my own initiative in the hope that it may he of some service to my constituents, and you are at liberty to us© it <as you, think 'best.—l am, etc., (Signed) J. ALLEN.