PROHIBITION IN THE UNITED STATES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18420, 5 December 1921, Page 10

PROHIBITION IN THE UNITED STATES.

' 1 -T BRITISH LABOUR MEMBERS’ REPORT. (From Oue Own Correspondent.! LONDON. October 7. Further testimony regarding prohibition in the United States is forthcoming from two Labour members of the House of Commons, Mr Charles H. Sitch and Mr John E. Davison, who have been on a special tour of investigation. Their main conclusion is:— “Wo went with open minds, although ,wo had been impressed with the idea gathered at home that prohibition had proved an unmixed blessing to that wonderful country. With this we do not agree.” They find that prohibition, as it has been imagined in this country, does not exist. “It has resulted in an enormous development of home brewing and winemaking. Illicit stills are quite common in private houses, and the necessary apparatus can be purchased in the stores. We constantly observed the production by business men from their persons or attache cases of receptacles containinar liquor, and wo saw jewellers’ shops displaying large quantities of pocket flasks for sale. One element of this business of private brewing is the opportunities it affords the “common ■ informer,” than whom there is no personality, except that of the blackmailer, more odious to an Englishman. We were frequently assured that jyhereas formerly business men were content with only an occasional drink at saloons, they were no in the habit of taking quantities of liquor to their offices for private consumption.” i

) Their considered view is: “Whether the new law will result in any permanent improvement for the vast majority of our cousins across the sea can only be definitely ascertained after a period of years. Our fellow-countrymen at home would he well advised to watch events, for if at long last prohibition proves thc salvalion of the American people, their course will be perclear. Hut this at least we will say, that if ever it is sought to impose a similar law on our Statute Book the electors must see that it is not planted upon them 1 m the dark, but that its acceptance shall i bo only after full- opportunity has been afforded for its adequate consideration, and i ifc has been submitted for their approval I and consent in a constitutional manner.”