MR J. A. MILLAR AND THE LICENSING LAW.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 12989, 2 June 1904, Page 10

MR J. A. MILLAR AND THE LICENSING LAW.

TO TIIE EDITOR. Sin,—lt is nine months since I had ocoa sion to castigate Mr Millar in tho Garrisoi Hall, and ho is still smarting under it. N< wonder, for the sting lay in the fact tha tho castigation was enforced and driven lionn by tho emphatic endorsiwnent of a mass meet ing of about 2000 of Mr Millar's constitu ent,s, and of a still larger number in: th< city and country, It is some satisfaction t< know that it has had the effect of unmask mg Mr Millar. Ho noiy repeals his slande-i on tho Dunodin Licensing Committee, am quotas Mr Justice Williams ia support. Bui that learned judge decided exactly the coiv trary of wha-t Mr Millar says. In Hewitt , ! ease- (from Invcrcargill) ho held that corn.' mittees were not bound to consider tht competing merits of applicants or of theii houK-s. If Mr .Millar's statement is correct, why did not tho aggrieved applicants appeal to Jutlgo Wiilianis? They wero bette: advised. Mr Millar admits that he was elected to Urn Ilouso in 1893 by tlio support of the lempcranoo parly, and that he then advocated Ihe baro majority. The. Temperance party still stands whero it did in 1893, but whero is Mr Millar? Hβ ha., gone wholly and absolutely over to the- trade, and outHorods 1-lorod in bis wild advocacy. Last night ho did not mention that he had himself introduced a Licensing BUI into tho llouso in 1893. Did ho not do this for and at the request of the trade? Mr Millar says that the bill framed by the Allianco in 1895 provided for district prohibition, and that clan?? 9 of tJio Premier's bill of 1903 " contained identically what tliuy had asked for in their own bill" of 1895. This is absolutely inaccurate, In the Alliance -measure iit was provided that on no-license bsing carried in a district, "Any person who shall solicit or receive any order for or supply or deliver or send any liqiuii , within such district," should bo liable to fine. Clause 9 of Inst year's bill made it. a crime to bo found in possession of liquor in a no-lieense district. The firet aimed at the. "supply" of liquor, section 9at the mere possession of it. Aral yet Mr Millar has the effrontery to say they are identical! I assert that tho policy of the Alliance has not changed in any important particular since 1893, and Mr Millar knows it right well. lint where stands Mr Millar! Hβ finds absolutely nnlmnj; but good in Mr Soddon's bill of last year. Ho says that the main objection of inn- party was lo clause 9 Is ho rually 'so ignorant:' Tho objections mada to tlio bill by resolutions of the

O'.'iincil'.of Churches and United Tompei'9UCO Reform Council, published in your issiu> of October 27 last, and endorsed throughout the colony, were:— 1. That the , bill as'a whole is framed in the interests of licensees, and not of tho people. - j 2. That it abolished tho reduction vote. 5. That it fined persons in possession of' liquor wider clause 9. : 4. That it sought to destroy the triennial : vote by moans of a bastard referendum. 5. That .by section 11 it would practically; make local option a farce. j 6. That it abolished elective committees i and qualified liquor-dealers to sit on licensing committees. 7. That it gave right to increase bats. 8. Gave six years' rc-newal, to some licensees. 9. TOiilo in form granting a second polt whero first invalidated, by section 35 it robbed tho electors of any chance of an effective second poll. 10. Would foroa licenses into Native districts, etc., Mr Millar, in face of this, says, " Nothing ; in tho "/ill took away power from tho ', people." . I Not a. singlo person in the country ven- ! tured to challenge- any of theso objections, except No. 2, but Mr Miliar brushes them all aside, and says, " Tho Alliance refused to trust the people to do anything in regard to this bill." He is very far out. Tho Alliance, trusted the people to compel the rejection of tho bill, an! tho people did it. Now about Ncwtcwn. Brace, and Chalmers. Mr Millar says the polls in all theso cases were upset on tMliiiiealife, and that Chalmers, is en. the samo footiug as the other two. But in Newtnwn and Bruce, kho pooplo's volo was set iwido, and in; CMiners it was successfully dofondod. Is i that no dift'ertneo in the eyes of this memter, v.-ho "trusts tho people '"! Why does he drag in Chalmers? Is it so that his friftuds may liavo a chance to defeat the voto as in the, other eases? The whole

colony is still ringing with indignant protests against tho gross injustice done to Ji'c-wtown and Braoo through a scandalous law. Even Mr. ScMon «us obliged to admit that a- wrong had ken done, and must he prevented for the future. But llr Millar, in his place in House, nsked "What injustice has boon done to the people of Brace at .all! Tho people of Bruce have by law taken their poll, and by a three-fifths majority they havo enacted no-Hconse. The law says that this is to remain in foroe, provided the poll wm taken in a regular manner; and the court has held that the poll iras taken in an irregular manlier. It is not a question of the secrecy,of the ballot alone; bub if.the honourable member will look up tho act he will find that it is laid down definite])- that, if the polling booth has been oi>en before or after tho hours laid down, that it-elf voids an election. That was so ona?t«l by this House and wo knew perfectly well what wo were doing," etc. "If the honourable- member brings in a bill, or any other member of the House brings in a bill, providing for :i second poll being takon for Bruce, Chalmers, and Newtown, and puts in a clause that the provision for a half-poll shall not tike effect, but that the three-fifths majority of those voting shall carry it, then I shall be in favour of that, and I say it is llio proper course to tnko." And this mark you, after tho polls had been sot aside. Sir Millar knew then in 1895 what the effect of the act then passed would lie, and dctemls the outrage upon public rights! Ue is in favour of a second poll. In the House ho said the Government ought to provide for one, and he would sunport it. But lie voted against Mr DuthicV amendment requesting the Government to bring in a bill to secure a second poll. He does not even now admit that the law must bo amended. "Next session," he thought. they ought to coneolidate their lawa instead of going in for anything new." Just so; and the. next polls are to bo rendered futi.e, .as Newtown and Bruce havo been! I apologise for length. It was necessary to expose this shallow and misleading deliverance. I think the electors will now see just whore their middle inembsr stands on ihis burning quration.—l am, etc., ~ Alex. S. Adams. May 10.