LICENSING REFORM.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8180, 23 July 1912, Page 5

LICENSING REFORM.

(To tho Editor "N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—There is one matter referred to by the deputation of the New Zealand Alliance to the Premier, as reported in this morning’s “Times,” which is of far more importance to the electors as a whole than would at first appear. 1 refer to that passage which reads. "And precautions taken to prevent the result of a poll being interfered with. They wanted tho scrutiny to bo so thorough and complete that there could be no possible chanco of 'tampering’ between tho day of the election and the declaration of the poll.” It is pleasing to note that the Premier recognises the importance of this, as seen in his answer, vifc., “Ho was also in favour of a full, free, and complete expression of opinion from tho people of the conni try as given expression to at the polls.” Now, sir, can wc bo reasonably assured that tho 'wish of the people as expressed at tho poll shall prevail under tho present system? What is the position? After the poll has been care-

fully conducted, even assuming we had a eu-an roll and only those entitled had voted, the booths aro closed and a count of tho ballot papers is carefully mads in the presence of the deputy returning officers, poll clerks, and scrutineers of both parties. The result is then made known, but it should be thoroughly understood that this count and these results aro in no way official or binding, and only serves to let the public (including tho "trade" and “prohibition parties”; know what is supposed to be carried. Tho official and binding count does not take jdaee lor days, sometimes weeks, after tne poll. The official declaration of the last prohibition poll was not made till two months after the ballot, during which time the papers are in the solo possession of the deputy returning or returning officers distributed all over the Dominion, and each of these men have sole act-ess to his particular portion of those ballot papers. Now, sir, even if Mr Malcolm’s X>iii for the 55 per cent, is carried, and surely it ought to bo, prohibition, if carried, would only be carried by a narrow margin, and with tho facilities for tampering with these papers and the millions oi pounds involved in a national vote, can it be reasonably assumed that the wish of the people would be allowed to remain when the tampering of any portion of these papers would probably upset the whole Dominion vote? And it has been proven that tampering is po,--cable. Is ft not more reasonable to assume, in fac-o of past experiences, that an attempt to upset the vote would bo made? Then why should not tho count made on the night of the poll, in tho presence of (ho deputy returning officers, poll clerks, and scrutineers of both parties, be official, subject, as now, to magisterial recounts or inquiries? It would bo in all ways the best, and eacli set of men would only have hundreds instead of thousands of votes to count, and each .scrutineer to watch one returning officer and poll clerk instead of perhaps a dozen, as now, at tho official counts. I trust that others of your readers will take this matter up and push it to a successful and equitable issue.— I am, etc..

TIIOS. TOWNSEND Pctone, July 17th.