Truth STATE-CONTROL.

NZ Truth, Issue 174, 17 October 1908, Page 4

Truth

STATE-CONTROL.

Published eyeey Saturday morning AT LUKE'S IjAITE (OF? lIANNERSSTBeet), Wellington, N.Z. SUBSORIPTION (IN ADVANOE^ 133, , , : PER ANNUM.

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1908

A No-License Lie.

• Certain no-license liars have recently been getting io some fine work m furtherance of their prohibition campaign by spreading the report that no-licehse is only the stepping-stone •to State control. Of course they don't tell this tale to any but the people who strenuously object to the liberty of the .people being interfered with by the prohibition of the sale of intoxicants m- certain, districts, and- who ■for some personal ireason find fault with the present licensing system. There area very large number of .these people m the community; the prohibition crowd have not been slow to take note of the fact; and as a result we find several people who . have been led to believe that if they vote !'nolicense" they are helping forward a system of State control for the whole of the liquor traffic of New Zealand. It is certainly a very < cunning move on the part of the cold-waterites. A very tempting bait indeed to catch the Socialist vote. All is fair m love and war and politics, but when it comes to Prohibition Party politics, the limit of fairness becomes as stretchable as a fishing story. . '

In the first place the cold water person doesn't want State control any more than he wants licensing bench control. He , wants weak tea. and ginger 'pop all the time— not ' that cold , tea and the other thing isn't good for him. He . can have it to his heart's content if he wants it; but he isn't satisfied with it himself, he wants everyone else to have it. Now, who ever heard of even 13ie . greatest advocate of booze m the world trying to suppress tea and other pleasant enough beverages for' the sake of forcing all men to drink intoxicants ? The idea is absurd. If any man suggested that all liquors bar alcoholic liquors he prohibited, he'd be , consigned to the nearest hospital- for the insane without the option. And yet nobody seems to realise that there is just as much (ground for locking iip / this pestiferous push of prohibition praters who have, for the last decade, been upsetting politics m New Zealand, and by their ■machjayeiian machinations and mischievous meddlings «done more to retard the tide of democratic progress than any other element in ' modern politics, as there wouM he for detaining the lunatic who wanted to prohibit the sale , of meat because his grandmother got choked with a saveloy. In the early days of the tern, perance question the advocates of teetotalism were honest enough m their endeavors ito, as they thought, better their, fellow-men. They contented themselves with preaching their' doctrine and leaving it to the public whether they followed their advice or not. It W^s not until the professional temperance reformer came to light that- the mischief , aro.se. He stumped the country and found the game a good one, and it wasn't long before he began to use the influence he had with the blue riband band to work his way into politics. Nothing could, have been more disastrous for politics. The temperance party arc of all shades of political color, and as they are mostly recruited from the. class of people whose minds • are not capable of containing more thaJi one idea at a time,, all political principles were sunk to send a prohibition advocate to Parliament. The party leaders were unable '" to' convert more ; than a small section of the community to their way. of thinking, and like .all fanatics, looked about them for a way of forcing the majority to yield to the minority-. Thus they became a political factor, and a very dangerous political factor at that.

And having climbed into politics by unscrupulous methods, they are not above using unscrupulous methods to obtain political ends. Hence it is that this tale about no-license being the forerunner of State control has been fired oft to catch a certain portion af the public. It was /reported m the daily press some little time 'back that the hairdressers assisfe ants had decided to vote no-license, and.' that they hoped to see the liquor traffic under State control. The no license pi:sh made double capital of this : They bcorn-.'" cd the barbers as having become converts/ to teetotalism, and they worked the' State-control gag for all it was They are absolutely wrong m botaijG^er^ , The facts of the barbei* business £re 41& I:; ply this, that m Napier one of th(i.let(j_ ing hotelkeepeLs made a spcvialit^ oi^jve cigar and cigarette business, aivd-'lJi©/-.^'-bac-conists got up on their bind; ifcgiß^ and made . violent protest. They stsitpd A^^ if the trade was going to' \co*;,> e 4 against their business they wo.ul'UJiT-Yxite-i against the trade. And when/■a£Kffi£Tjpfrtbey, .would get on for a.drin^'U^fjt^g

control arguments came up. So it will be seen that the barbers' protest has no bearing whatever upon the liquor f[uestion as the public understands it. It is simply a. question of trade .interest. The tobacconist wanla to stop the publican from selling cigars and cigarettes, and that is all there is to it. He would like to stop the grocer and tlie Chinese vegetable man from doing the same thing, but these people don't have to pay a big license fee to run their business, and don't have to run the gauntlet of that peculiar thing, public opinion, every three years to retain their right to trade, so they are safe. The publican, because he ie a publican, and ' has to pay a stiff license fee 'for the right of being a publican, is up against it all the time. It doesn't seem logical somehow, and yet the No-license Patty say he should have his license taken away from him without a penny of compensation.

Reverting back to the cry that universal no-license will ultimately mean State control, let it be pointed out right here that this is absolutely absurd. How can the State control something that is not m existence ? If no-license is carried m any district, it is illegal for drink to be retailed m that district. If it is illegal for the individual it is illegal for the State. And should the Government propose to open an hotel m a prohibited area what an outcry would the prohibition party raise. They would accuse the Government of d Tying the wishes of the majority... They would fight State, control both tootli and nail, so let the moderate drinker, who wduld like to see the liquor traffic conducted by the State beware. ' Ho has -no chance of getting State control by voting no-licensef And again, what a hurdle for any Government to take up the control of the entire liquor traffic at one swoop. The Minister for Pubs would have to be a greater genius than this country has seen for, some time. No, State control is not for the next few decades, and the .talk of no-license being a step m that direction is so much prohibition twaddle circulated to catch a certain number of the moderate voters. , -. . .