THE DELIVERER.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18675, 3 October 1922, Page 3

THE DELIVERER.

"Iff were anxious to be in a dry ciiuniiv, I would go back to England. It is just possible 1 would not, be asked to accept, fermented liquor in at least one or two homes that I visited,"—CL K. Chesterton, interviewed in Detroit. : Last night at His Majesty’s Theatre. Mr "Pussyfoot" Johnson, who has come from America to deliver tho people of Now Zealand from "tho boast, that is gnawing at its vitals." told his story. Mr Johnson does not adopt, any technical methods. His address was mainly confined to figures ami •Ht-culled Facts, as they could bo applied -solely to America. Mr Johnson makes some startling claims for the wholesome effect of prohibition in America. He has his volume of .statistics, and he quotes them to show how the mnoher of arrests, crimes, and other mils have been reduced under prohibition. <'u the other hand, the New York Times Current History. June. 1G22. published a (able showing dime records from 30 American cities, and it shows that the arrests in 1921 in iho.-o cities alone amounted to 6-10,402. being an increa.se of 123,567 over the previous year. What is wrong with the system of civilisation old England has built up under license—a system adopted by Canada, Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand? Is there a more virile race than that; of the English, Scottish, and Irish? Is (here a-'cleaner-living race? In (he held of sport, the Britisher holds his own with tho world, and his reputation as a “sport" is of the very highest whenever he takes part in athletic games. In New Zealand, the descendants ■of the Old T.and hold dear the high sentiments of life which have been handed down to them —there is nothing menu in the make-up of the New Zealander—lie lias certainly not been debased by the temperate use of alcoholic, liquors. The average New Zealander can lake a glass of beer or spirits and also leave, it alone. Our land is wonderfully free from crime. The Now Zealander, in fact, nni't resent, anv comparison of his life with tho conditions which Mr “Pussyfoot" Johnson says besot the Americans. America is a land where the multi-millionaire flourishes, and where, on tho other hand, the underworlds have their thousands of criminals Moreover, there is not wanting plenty of evidence tq contradict Air "Pussyfoot” Johnson in his assertions on the heaven-sent blessings following on prohibition. Tho late Lord Northcliffo stated on his return from America: “I went into the United States with an open mind on the subject; I same away convinced that 'prohibition as I saw it at work there is not tho right solution of the drink problem." The editor of the London Daily Express ■ stated after a visit to America, a few months ago: "I am a temperate man. but I drank more• spirits in teetotal America in three weeks than I have consumed in England in two years; by which I mean that I drank tho normal amount averaged by prohibited Americans io-dav. They do not necessarily care to drink spirits at every meal, but their outraged sense of having been forced into prohibition impels them to do so if only for the sake of protest,” Why should New Zealand follow (he example of the Americans in tho face of facts such as these? Where is the democracy which enables tho wealthy man to imbibe as much alcohol as he desires but prevents tho poor man from doing likewise? Of course, the poor man can appease his thirst by consuming wood alcohol and finish in the madhouse. Mr James 11. Beck, the Solicitor-general of tho United States, whilst on a visit to England about three months ago, made the following statement, which was published in the leading London papers:— (a) An appalling increase in crime. (b) A great growth in tho use of narcotics. (c) Lessening of respect for the authority of tho law, owing to widespread violations of the Act. What do Mr Johnson’s so-called facts and figures prove in the face of such a direct statement? Mr Samuel Hopkins Adams, a well-known and respected writer in America, who at one time wrote favourably in support of prohibition, staled in iho American papers on Juno 3, 1922, that “more wine was made, and presumably more consumed, in ‘dry’ United States'in 1921, than in any ono previous year of the ‘wet’ United States history. More wine w-ill be consumed in 1922 than in 1921. About five times as much heavy beer was drunk in the United Slates in 1921 than in any previous year on record." Where do all 'the glowing assertions of Mr Johnson lend to in the face of such a statement as (his? What, is wrong with Now Zealand under license? It is no crime to drink a glass of beer or a glass of whisky. Mr “Pussyfoot” Johnson, however, and his followers, would make it a crime. The great moral teacher of the ages—the Bible —has put forward no dictum against the use of spirituous liquor. St Paul said: “Bn not drunk with wine wherein is excess,” but lie did not say. “drink no wine.” The teaching of the Bible, in effect, is pointed towards the building up of character to enable a man or woman to be temperate in the use of liquor. It does not lake away the temptation. Tho moral aspect of temperance in all thinas is the true aspect. Mr “Pussyfoot" Johnson would remove the temntation by Act of Parliament, What of the moral fibre of the individual under such a method of restriction? Moreover, the temptation is not removed —wo have hundreds of American authorities to prove this—rather it is accentuated.

PROHIBITION ADVOCATE REPENTS. 4 JUDGE’S CONFESSION. New York', June 4th, 1922. Under the above heading, the London Times prints the following:— “In his annual address as President of the Georgia Bar Association, Judge Arthur J. Powell declared, in regard to prohibition, that ‘in his calm, deliberate judgment, no enactment of such widespread, vicious, universally debasing effect of a law and the enforcement of it has ever been imposed on our people. I was,’ he proceeded ‘one of those who helped to draw tip and to pass the Prohibition Law in Georgia 1 I thought I was right. Cold facts have convinced me to tho contrary.’ But, tho astounding part of the introduction of No-liceu?e into America is the fact that it was never brought, about by a national referendum. Tho decision was arrived at through the action and the vote of tho politician. The Literary Digest is at present, conducting a poll—a. poll which is not confined to men —and it is claimed that it, will give THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY EVER GIVEN TO CITIZENS TO TAKE PART IN A NATION-WIDE VOTE ON PROHIBITION. Let the people of New Zealand hold fast to their liberty. The example America has set the world in some things, including their so-called No-license, is not of such a, high standard that our little country should desire to follow it. The experience in America is that prohibition does not prohibit. Advt.