NEW ZEALAND ALLIANCE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 30 July 1924, Page 8

NEW ZEALAND ALLIANCE

NELSON, WAIRAU, AND MOTUEKA AREA

A meeting of. the Area Council of the Nelson, Marlborough and Motueka Area of Now Zealand Alliance organisation was opened in the L.0.1L Hull at 10 a.in. July 23rd, when a reprseentativo gathering was presided over by the Rev. J. McNeill. After opening devotional exercises the delegates were welcomed by Mr IL Watson. The chairman then addressed the gathering and stressed the fact, that faith in their cause was something that would nc- , cmplish what, their enemies declared to be npossible, namely prohibition. Rev. 11. L. 151amires briefly reviewed the situation from a worid point of view, stating that, the records of the past were an inspiration for the present and the. future. He urged the wide diffusion of information concerning New Zealand's no-license districts. 1 hoy had in the record of their experience all the information and facts that were needed to justify the abolition of the liquor traHic in New Zealand. They did not need to go to America, splc/i did though the results there were. Mr YV., G. Carpenter dealt with the subject of organisation. He traced the growth of the movement and indicated tiie steps taken in reorganisation some twelve months ago The fight had taken on a new aspect, and lie urged the necessity of dropping the purely local out look and realising that this was a Gomillion with; conflict conducted under a scheme of Dominion wide organisation. lie also emphasised the need tor increased development of work amongst the young people and especially amongst, the. young women. Discussion of these topics followed each address and the Convention adjourned for lunch. In the afternoon the subject of Publicity was dealt with by the Rev. J. Laird. The discussion being opened by Mr J. Russell. Some valuable points were brought out. Mr C. W. Barker of Blenheim, dealt with the subject of finance, Pastor J. Watt opening the discussion. Mr C. R. Edmonds, Dominion organiser, contributed a pointing and inspiring address on this topic. The meeting proceeded to elect officers as follows: President, Mr C. W. Parker (Blenheim); vice-presidents, Mr Edgar Wratt (Motueka), Robert McCallam (Wairau). Honorary secretary, Mr H. P. Forster (Nelson). Representative on the New Zealand Alliance Executive Mr C. W. Parker. Electorate representatives on the Area Council: Blenheim, Messrs D. Jenkins, W. D Sanders, D. McCallum; Picton, Rev. S'. Batcup; Havelock, Mr R. T. 11. Wcarnc; Motueka, Mr G. M. Cresswell, and two to be appointed. Nelson, Rev. 11. L. Blamires, Miss R. .Atkinson, Mr R. Watson; Richmond, Pastor E. T. Jones.

Miss Atkinson was scheduled on the programme to deal with the question of the women voters, but through indisposition was not able to give the address, Airs Blamires kindly taking her place. She said that the best way to win the women voters was to place the facts before them in a sympathetic way and appeal to them on the basis of sacrifice. She said she had noticed on a number of the stones of rememberanee in England these significant words, "Live for England, we died for her.” Women never hesitated to sacrifice for their offspring and for the protection of their homes.

Mr T. Vercoe gave an intreesting address on the question of winning votes by' personal contact. He believed it would be possible, to win prohibition at the next election if every worker would undertake to secure two men voters between now atid election day.

The evening session was field in the Baptist Church. Air W. G. Carpenter presided until 8.30. when the Rev. J. Laird took the chair for the remaining part of the evening. In the absence of Mr F. V. Knapp through illness, Pastor E. T. Jones, introduced the subject of the young people's work. Afr J. Alalton Alurray said he proposed to read to the meeting a resolution thiit ho would offer for their acceptance. Before lie read the resolution he would like to explain briefly what corporate control implied. Corporate control was a scheme for making the Government a partner in the liquor traffic. A Board of nine members was to be set up to whom, the brewers, wine and spirit merchants, and hotelkeepers woukl sell their businesses. it could not be said with certainty what the values would be, but they would probably mean total of £10,000,000. The Government was to be allotted one-fifth ol the shares, but would not get any dividend for at least ten years. Aleanwliile its name would be used as a partner in the liquor traffic, lie then read the following resolution:

"That this meeting opposes the placing of corporate control as an issue on tlie ballot paper for the following reasons: (1) It is advocated and financed by brewers, wholesale wine and spirit merchants, retail hotel keepers and freehold owners of iieensed houses, and is, therefore, in the interest of the liquor traffic which is already represented on the ballot paper by the issue of continuance. (if) It is not a reform because it makes no change in the real control, as the present owners of the liquor traffic would hold 30 per cent of the stock proposed to be vested in the corporate control corporation and would thus be in a position to dominate the Control Board. (3) If carried, Corporate Control would remove the liquor business beyond the power of the people to affect it for a period of ten years, thus more effectively securing the life of a traffic opposed by over 300,000 voters. (4) The inevitable result of this proposal would be to cumber the ballot paper vvitli another issue calculated to serve the liquor interests by splitting votes.

He would further like to point out that t-h'.' feur members on the Board as representing the liquor traffic would only 20 per cent of the shares, upon Corporation. The live men nominated by the Government would represent, only 20 per cen tof the shares, upon which, by the way, the Government would not be getting a penny of dividend. Every business man knew that it was those who held the bulk of the stock in any business concern who had the real effective control. Therefore, once again Corporate Control was not a reform, it made no change in those conducting the traffic. It should be borne in mind that this proposal had been before the electorates for consideration in 1922 when they were invited to vote for State Purchase and Control, not because they wanted that issue carried, but to show the Government that they wanted reform. The total who voted after a vigorous advertising campaign by the Modernta League was only 35,727, or less than 6 per cent of (.lie voters. Teh petition which was presented to Parliament in favour of the Corporate Control issue represented less than 1 per cent of the voters who polled in 1922. The Auckland hotel keepers are opposed to this proposal as they claim that the Government should he made to purchase at proper marketvalue whatever is taken over under Corporate Control. Mr Bunkliart, a notable member of the liquor traffic in Auckland, declared that they did not want to see it carried being desirous of being allowed to conduct their own business in their own way. It wo'iild be seen, therefore, that there is no important body of public opinion asking for this issue.

Mr Murray said that the Alliance was charged with seeking to disfranchise

the State Purchase and Control voters by having that issue taken off the ballot. paper. But that was what the New Zealand Licensing Reform Association was doing. That Association included the Aloderale League, now openly associates with brewers and liquor merchants. The Moderate League has apparently persuaded 35,727 voters to believe that Stale Purchase and Control was the best remedy' for the liquor evil. But after advocating that for years that same Moderate League was now. in conjunction with the liquor interests. willing to betray its supporters by asking • hat- State Purchase he taken off the ballot- paper and Corporate Control put. on in its place —a scheme that did not ensure Government control. Perhaps that was why the late chairman of the Christchurch branch of the Aloderale League and other influential members were not. connected with the Christchurch branch of the N.Z. Licensing Reform Association. Intelligent people who might, sincerely disagree with prohibition, were not prepnr ed to lie made catspaws of in the interest- of the liquor traffic.