A MESSAGE FROM MAINE.

NZ Truth, Issue 328, 7 October 1911, Page 5

A MESSAGE FROM MAINE.

THE VERDICT-REPEALED BY 20 MAJORITY The Victory-44,000 Majority Completely Reversed

AT THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY GRANTED PEOPLE TO VOTE,

Out Prohibition From The Constitution.

Confirmed by Cable— The People and their Vote— Prohibiten aad tbe Constiiiitioii— Tlie Cables Copied — Wbat S. S. Sloane Says— False and Misleading— Tbe Might and Main of Maine — Denied the Right of Appeal—A Lesson for New Zealand — Technical Objection — When the News Wiil be Knows — On October 9.

Copy of Cable sent to New York on the 29th September, 1911 :— "Refer to your telegram of the 20th contradicted by Prohibitionists, telegraph report giving full and complete detail how many vote for vote against repeal ; send all papers by first mail m re." The following reply was received on tiie 30th September, 1911 :— "Vote for repeal of Prohibition, 60,481 ; vote against, 60,461 ; majority m favor of repeal of Prohibition, 20. All cities excepting one voted for repeal of Prohibition ; country districts voted against. The Prohibitionists have technical objection, and official recount is now being made. Final result will not be known until October 9. The last referendum was taken m 1884. Prohibition then had a majority of 44,000 m its favor, now converted into a minority of 20." ,

i Commenting on the -cable from New York, Mr W. S. S. Sloane, Organiser for the Provincial Council, states : In response to a cable of inquiry, the cable from New York, as published, was received m Auckland on Saturday by a member of the Provincial Council, from an undoubtedly reliable spurce, and I think thoroughly proves HOW FALSE AND MISLEADING is the statement "Maine Prohibition Victory," accredited, to the New Zealand Alliance and given such wide publicity per medium of the press. Unfortunately, the wish was father to the thought that gave vent to the expression of victory, when m truth and m fact a 44,000 majority m favor of the untried experiment of Constitutional Prohibition was reversed, AND A MAJORITY OF 20 recorded for the abandonment thereof. At the very first opportunity given the people of Maine to freely express their will by their votes, notwithstanding that m 1684, 70,783 people voted l for Prohibition, that is, about 74.8 per cent, and only 23,511 voted against the experiment, that is, 25.2 per cent. Now, but 49.1 j per cent of the persons who have tried Prohibition can be found to | uphold it. This shows a clear gain j of about 102 per cent m the vote m j favor of License and Sane Regulation. This., after years pf exp'eri- ! ence and some three score of additions and amendments to the Pro- ; hibitory enforcement pf statutory jlaws, mainly attempting a more | drastic enforcement, and all emanat- ! ing from the dominant political Rro- - 11 hibition Party who, for 27 years, dejnied the people ! THEIR RIGHT OF APPEAL TO j THE BALLOT. I Maine, m this overwhelming reversal jof public opinion has only followed 'the example of her sister States, and! iat this writing, Maine, New Hamp- ' shire, Vermont, Massachussets, I Rhode Island, Connecticut, New ; York, Ohio, lowa, Michigan, South i Dakota, Alabama, Nebraska, m i fact, east, west, south, and' north, |.15 out of 17 States that have tried i Prohibition m one form or another have all abandoned and repudiated i it. The wave of sentiment which '_ swept across the Continent has now | receded, forced back by the know* i ledge gleaned from bitter experi- ; ence, which laid bare the cold fact i that it was only I SENTIMENTAL AND UTOPIAN, i and m practical application caused ■•deficits m revenue which must be ..made good from direct taxes. It | proved that substantial and unpar- ; donable lin.mry was being wrought ito the rights of property and the I rights of Labor. It showed that j Prohibition had always been an ab- : ject failure, ancL above ami beyond i all that it was an infraction of the most sacred rights of the liberty of !the citiren. Surely the American people of these States should be '. given the credit of having adopted i Prohibition m good faith with an i honest and earnest desire to further ; the interest and welfare of their ! citizens ? No sensible person can ■now believe that these people would ' have deliberately repudiated a sys- ■ tern ADOPTED WITH HIGH MORAL PURPOSE ■ had they found that that system was making for sobriety, prosperity, or for good citizenship. Tho only conclusion consistent with reason ' and common sense is that thc people found they had built on false hopes, | that conditions were not only no j better, but were far worse than they j aad been under the License system. j Surely here m New Zealand, you .•;>■<• .'•■itt'tlert to have facts not fancies presonieii to you. It is only right, and fair, and just, and honest that only the exact conditions should be placed before the people by those who pose as members of the whole people of this country ? That those leaders and their many followers who father and by their labor ' FURTHER THB PROPAGANDA OF PROHIBITION, and who lend themselves and their efforts m an attempt to bring about the enforcement of a doctrine, the moral, the social, the economic results and effects' of which would be of such tremendous import to the wage earner, to the producers, to the workers, to the wives, to the mothers, and to the children of this country, should be compelled to adhere to facts and quote concrete examples. Surely statistics, not sentiment, results, not excuses, should bo the basis of their oduea- I tion oi." these people whom thi-y ask 'a i wipe out an established industry and j close established means of employ- | ment and the wage-earning' source of j

I so large a proportion of the population of this country. If the figures given me are correct, and 11,000 workers are directly employed m the [ industry m New Zealand, this means that more than one m every 100 men, women and children are so employed, and as the services of children are NOT UTILISED IN THE INDUSTRY, it follows that one m about every 40 of tie adult population is drawing his or her sustenance from the industry. I maintain, m view of this, that I am right m assuming that the question of Prohibition or Continuance of existing conditions is the most serious political and economic question at present before the people of this country, especially m. view of what it would mean to your country, what It would mean to labor, what it would mean to agriculture, what it would mean to railway earnings, what it would mean to steamship freights, what it would mean to the rights of property, What it would mean to local government, What it would mean to allied trades, and what it would mean TO YOUR WHOLE LIBERTY. Before this contemplation I stand aghast, and I feel I am fully justified m protesting when the Press— that modern bulwark of public opinion and education of the people — and the pulpit — that forum from which so many people are influenced— are made us a of to disseminate false statements or half truths m an endeavor to wipe out an industry, so clearly allied to the progress and prosperity, both moral and material, of this fair country.