THE LOCAL OPTION ISSUE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14355, 27 October 1908, Page 8

THE LOCAL OPTION ISSUE.

Sir,—Mnnj o{ tho contributors to your' valuable paper will bo pleased to notice the new feature which appears in to-day's issuo of the Otago Daily Times. 1 refer to the local in which -you vouch for tho accuracy of the figures that have been used 'so prominently during the last few days in an advertisement which gives statistics to prove that drunkenness is very prevalent in Maine, that paradise of tho No-licenso party. As the local option approaches, very many of the electors are hesitating aa to what course to adopt-whethcr to put up with cvito they know of or risk creating others which may prove worse. If you can, therefore, see youy, way to vouch for tho accuracy of the facts which these figures are quoted to prove,' you will be doing a groat service to the community. This request would not be necessary but for the fact thai, someweeks ago figures were published in tho Daily Times, and vouched for by a wellknown and respected citizen, proving that drunkenness in Dunedin had declined very satisfactorily during tho last low years. These figures were official, and yet within a few hours another set of figures, also official, put an entirely different complexion on the point at issue. You can, therefore, understand the dilemma in which many who have tho welfare of the people thoroughly at heart are placed, as at this\ date it is impossible to obtain absolutely reliable information from Maine lieforo polling day. Many, I know, are inclined to try no-license, feeling that things can scarcely be worse, while they 'may bo better. Can you help those who, to use agood Scotch word, are Switherkg. Dunedin, October 24. Sill,—ln the discussion now going on between the No-licenso party and the trade agent, Mr \V. Thomson, there is a point to which the No-license pavty has hardly referred, and yet I think it is a strong point on its side. Mr W. Thomson and others, by way of proving the failure of nolicense, lay great stress upon tho fact that in no-license districts there is a good deal of sly grog-selling, that a groat deal of drink is sent into these districts, and that mothers' son's are there led to drink in tho ely grog-shops, etc. My point is this: Supposo wo, for argument's admit that it is all true, the question arises, Who is responsible for it all? It is certain that no-licenso people do not keep sly grog-shops, that no-licenso peoplo.do not send drink into no-license districts, and that no-license people do not'! lead mothers' sons to drink in. slv grogshops or elsewhere. . Who. then, does all this and more? Clearly there is only one answer, and that is, it is done by Mr W; Thomson's friend, tho trade and its friends. Mr Thomson has tried to prove too much for the good of his friends. If all he says is true—which I doubt,—then he has proved that the.members of'the Liquor party 'are " undesirables," as they set at naught the. laws of the country. It has never yet. been proved that the sly grog-selling did not, exist i n the districts before thev became no-license districts. I believe it did more or L°=s, only its existence' was not noticed because of the open bars. ' If Mr Thomson will only see to it that the Liquor partv.observes the laws of tho country..,he will not ha-ve much, to find fault with respecting tho mowil-fty.- oF nolicenso districts as far, as drink and its vesults are concerned.—l am, etc.. H! Pukdi*. St. Leonards. October 24-. '