THE STATE FARM.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1199, 22 February 1895, Page 21

THE STATE FARM.

DEPUTATION TO THE HON MR REEVES. In our last issue we mentioned that the Labour Department had been informed that an endeavour is, to be made to secure the transfer of a hotel license to a building closely adjacent to the State farm, and that the Minister for Labour was determined to do what he could' to prevent such a thing. On Tuesday afternoon a deputation of temperance people waited upon the Minister in reference to the matter. It was introduced by Sir Robert Stout, and consisted of Mr C. M. Luke (Mayor of Wellington), Mr J. Collins. (Mayor of Melrose), Mrs Pliinmer (Women's Christian Temperance Union), Mr H. Field (New Zealand Alliance), the Revs Baumber, Ward x .jMurray and Bradbury, and Messrs Atkinson, Helyer, Dodgshun, Gain and Sir Robert Stout, in stating the object of the deputation, said that they understood from that morning's Times that the Labour Department had already taken, or was willing to take, some action to prevent the effort to obtain the transfer of a hotel license to the borders of the State farm, and they were very glad to learn, this. They understood that a similar application had once or twice previously been before the Court, and that no steps had been taken by the department to resist it. They were exceedingly glad therefore to know that on this occasion steps were to be taken" to that end. The Minister of course was aware that many of the people for whom the State farm was designed were not of a class likely to withstand the temptations to strong drink which the existence of a hotel in close proximity to the farm would place in their way. He did not think a licensed house should be allowed there. It certainly would be of no advantage to the people of the district or to the residents on the. State farm, and the deputation, therefore, thought all possible steps should betaken to prevent the transference of a license to that locality. Mr Atkinson said they did not purport to be a Prohibition deputation, although some of them were Prohibitionists. As a matter of fact they had the support in this matter of those who were not Prohibitionists, and, as. Sir Robert Stout had stated, they were.pleased and,happy to know from the morning paper that the Labour Department had become aware of and was determined to oppose the attempt to open a publichouse near the State farm. The attempt had been'made twice previously, and nothing had been done by the department. On the first of these occasions there was not even a stick on the ground on which it was proposed to erect a new hotel, and on the second occasion there was only a little whare just about good enough for a small cow-shed. He understood that at that time the members of the Licensing Committee were nearly equally divided on the matter, and that since then there had been a change of one member which might possibly have the effect of just turning the scale. It might be that the absence of one member opposed to the application would result in its being granted. Although they were not all out-and-out enemies of the liquor traffic they were all out-and-out friends of the State farm, and knowing die Minister had the interests of this institution at heart, they felt confident of having his sympathy in protesting against the transfer of a hotel license to a site near the State farm. He had been informed that several prominent residents of the district had been very active on previous occasions in canvassing against the granting of the application. Last session the matter was mentioned in Parliament in the form of questions about the intention to apply for a transfer of a license between places nine miles distant, and expressed the hope that such an application would not be granted. But it was not stated that the application was to transfer the license of a hotel at Manakau to a building at Levin, near the State farm. As the New,. Zealand Times had pointed out that morning there.were "obvious reasons why the people whom the State farm is intended to benefit should be kept at a distance from the bar traffic of a hotel." Besides, there was already a hotel established at Levin, only a mile and a half distant from the State farm. The Licensing Committee was to sit on the sth of March, so that there was very little time to spare.

Mr C. M. Luke was not conversant with the details of the matter, but, speaking broadly, both as conserving the interests of the State farm and the interests of the Natives of the district, ho thought they should do their best to prevent the establishment of another licensed house in the district. He believed it would be generally admitted that the interests of the peoplo for whom the farm had been started would be best conserved by keeping them as far as possible from publichouses. and that it was also desirable to hinder the Natives from having facilities for getting drink. The Hon Mr Reeves thanked the depution for the very fair way in which they had put the case. It was true that the Labour Department contemplated taking action to protest against the transference of a license ..to a site near the State farm. His attention was specially called to the matter first by a letter which he received from a gentleman named Boyd, who resided, he thought, in the district. Until he got this letter on Sunday he was not aware that any fresh attempt was to be ■ made to obtain ■ a transfer of the license. The deputation had said, and he dared say quite truly, that when the last attempt was made no action was taken by the department. As far as ho could find out that attempt was made when he was away in Australia, which possibly accounted for the fact that no action was taken by the department. He had always been opposed to having a licensed hoxise in the close vicinity of the State farm.. . In the first place, there was no valid reason to allege for another hotel

in a purely agricultural district like that. There was already a largish hotel at Levin, only a mile and a half away from the State farm, along a good road on a dead flat country. He thought, therefore, the application might be opposed in the interests of the district, on the broad ground that another hotel was not required. Another ground was that an institution such as a State farm was not one which should have a bar traffic placed at its very door, so to speak. A State farm was not a home for inebriates, but it was established for people who have not succeeded in life, and it was not desirable that temptation should be placed in their way. He meant to do his utmost to prevent this license being granted. At first he had thought of sending an officer of the department to the Court to protest against the granting of the ' application, but on further reflection he concluded that it would be best to engage Mr Gully to appear on behalf of the department. This had been done. If necessary he would be instructed to appear by the manager of the farm, for he (Mr Reeves) was not quite clear whether the law permitted a man like himself, who was a non-resident, to take that action. If it did not, then the manager of the State farm would appear".'.'by., counsel (Mr Gully). No step would be neglected to make the protest effectual. Any suggestions the deputation might have to offer he would be glad to receive. Sir Robert Stout thanked the Minister for the action he had taken, and for the further action which he intended to take.