THE NO-LICENSE CAMPAIGN.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 29 October 1908, Page 2

THE NO-LICENSE CAMPAIGN.

THE BREWERS IN REPLY. TO THE BDITOR. Sir, — Permit me to use your coumns in which to reply to the adIress given by the Rev. H. F. Palmer it the Theatre last evening. Mr Palmer opened his address by stating that in New South Wales, owing to tho reduction vote, 292 hotels would be closed. Ho did hot, however, mention the fact that for all the nduses closed compensation would be paid. May Ibe allowed to suggest that this is another instance of the method of "educating-" the public adopted by the no-license party? Injustice do«s not appear to be one of the vices of the people of New South Wales. My point is of course obvious; no compensation is paid by the poople of New Zealand. Mr Palmer then referred to the evidently inspiriting fact that nearly 40,000,000 people of the American States are living under no-license, and further said "that one might as well try to stop the flow of the Hudson rivor with a whisk broom as to try to stop the prairie fire of prohibition that was sweeping over America. " The simile is an apt one; prohibition is as destructive as a great prairie fire. The whisk broom, or whisky broom, has swept into Amer cri during the fiscal year ending June 30th, 1907, no less than 11,409,252 gallons more of whisky than it did iv the previous year. We are to uadarstnnd by this that a great nunibor of the States have gone dry"? In connection with this subject I have just received a cony of the following: "Bangor, Maine, — Dear Sir, In answer to your inq jiry I will say that I have witnessed the operation of the prohibition law in this city for 30 years, and I can emphatically say that it is a failure. It does not lessen drunkenness, it rather increases it. Statistics will prove this! It bars the sale of good liquor in decent places; is antagonistic to good morals and good government. — Very Truly Yours, VicTon Brett, City Clerk, Ban. gor, Maine." Further comment on the American experiment is unnecessary. Mr Palmer then went on to refer to the cost of beer and profit on the same, but his statements are so utterly absurd, being based on figures supplied by some anonymous authority, that I will not further refer to them than by stating that, as ho bases his groundless assumption on the use of substitutes such as glucose, etc., in place of malt, I may say at once that no substitutes are used in the brewing of Nelson beer. I really think that the NoLicense party might well have refrained from such cowardly methods of attack. To me, and I think to ail other right-thinking people, such innuendoes based upon nothing more tangible than prejudice are cowardly in the extreme. Slanders die hard, but it might have been thought the old one about the common adulteration of beer was really dead. It has, however, been left to the no-license party in Nelson to attempt to galvanise it into life again, and for what purpose f Not to attompt to prove anything, but merely to help to excite as deep a feeling of animosity as passible against thoso engaged in the brewing industries. It looks as though this now attempt to bring discredit upon the browing trade in Nelson wero part of an organised calumny that is afoot. It is called "educating" tho people on the no-license question. By this sweet, reasonable system of "education" they hope to discredit us to such an extent as to make most men and women shudder at the name of beer a r .d wine quite as much as the children .<.t the beginning of the last century diil the same at the name of "OIJ Boney." Mr Palmer next referred to Invercargill and questioned my figures. I did not say, nor did I intend to say, that Invercargill consumed the amount of liquor stated; the amount stated referred to the three no-license districts, Invercargill, Ashburton, and Oamaru, and a glance at the Go van. - ment leturn will show that what I said was correct. To put it in another way, Invercargill consumed 123,952 gallons of liquor; Ashburton, 102,982 gallons, 3330 bottles of spirits, 8788 cases of spirits, etc.; Oamaru consumed 29,198 gallons, 37,766 bottles and Cl 2 cases; these fignures agreeing with the total I gave in my letter. Theso districts', like those in America, .have, according to no-license, "gir.j The Rev. Mr Palmer admit t<«l, I understand, that no-license is nj; an unqualified success, and I think mosi people whose minds have not bein I warped by prejudice or fanacieisn will not only heartily agree with Jim, but add that it is a dismal failure. So much being admitted, is it right, I would ask, that an injustice should be done from which no good can cume but from which worse undoubtedly will follow? Thanking you for your kindn'jrfs in allowing me to further use your space, — I am, etc., n. R. DUNCAN. Nelson Brewery, Oct. 2Stk

(In connection with our report in ; Wednesday's issue of tho "Mail" of tho Eev. Palmer's no-license address at tho Theatro on Tuesday last, in which it is stated that Mr Palmer roJ ferred to certain foreign substitutes l and adulterations being used in the I manufacture of beer, wo are roquest- ! Ed to state that it would be an erroi neous supposition in so far as it may . be read to infer that Mr Duncan or : any other brewer in Nelson used ■ such adulterations. Mr Palmer did not Tefer to Mr Duncan or any other local or other individual brewer in | this connection. In fact, he spocifil cally stated that he was not suggest- ' ing that Mr Duncan or any other brewer in Nelson had used or was using such adulterations in the manuI facture of their beer. We are informed that Mr Palmer's remarks on . this subject were based on information derived by him from the . perusal of an anonoymous article in i "The Encyclopaedia Britannica. " <. I In connection with the portion of the ■ report where Mr Palmer said that Mr ' Duncan's figures with regard to the ; consumption of liquor in Invercargill ] were "absolutely false," it should c [ distinctly understood, and we freely |. emphasise it, that there was no allu- ' 'sioiL or hint that Mr Duncan knew such fignures to be false. Obviously . the term applied solely to the figures, and: not to Mr Duncan; but in fairness the point of the difference should be clearly indicated. — Ed. N.E.M.)