THE POLICE AND THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19240, 2 August 1924, Page 6

THE POLICE AND THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

TO THR EDITOR. S<ir,—“Liberty’s” letter of this morning’s Times seems so formidable that 1 hesitate to answer it. However, its strength is more apparent than real. Ho seems to have lost his temper, and so becomes rather abusive. In effect, ho charges all who are not prohibitionists as not being good Christians simply because they don t view the teachings of the Master in the same perspective as prohibitionists do. If I believed that Christ taught prohibition I would turn a prohibitionist .this moment, but I can find nowhere in what “Liberty” calls of the Book of book* such a doctrine taught. As for our Lord Himself, He not only used wine, but ho made it. Not only that, but lie commanded it to- be taken in one of the most sacred rites of His Chureji as a remembrance of Himself. I am sure Ho never would have given this command if Ho had ever intended prohibition to be a creed of His Church. “Liberty” still wants to justify his figures, but ho says these figures are not his own, but are the findings of judges and police officials all over the civilised world. This is a very wide sphere, and “Liberty” must have been using a prohibitionist telescope instead of the spectacles in taking this extended view. But ttiil this is only “Liberty’s” own evidence, and not those he quoted from. In fact, it is only second-hand or hearsay evidence, and this kind of evidence would have but little value in a court of law. So I don’t value it much, though I don’t believe for a moment that “Liberty” made it, but- lias heard it from someone who in turn heard it from someone else. Then, to giv« more weight to his view, “Liberty’’ says none of those ho quotes are prohibitonists. This is rather perplexing, as one wou'd have thought that intelligent men, seeing the evils of drink, would have all turned prohibitionists. Then “Liberty” says we don’t usually fake into consideration »the expense of making the people happy by improving their status. But it takes time as well as expense to do this, and in this sense I thoroughly agree with “Liberty,” for after 2000 years the world is far from what it should be, though untold millions of money have been spent in trying to make it better, and this money has been all spent for the avowed purpose of making or inducing men to love each other even as they love themselves. This is the concentrated essences of Christianity, and it is the want of this that keeps the world what it is. It is the selfishness of unregenerate man that causes all this strife we see both between men individually, and between nations. It is the cause of all war, both civil and international This selfishness is the love of money—an evil Christ emphatically condemns more often than any other evil. St. Paul calls it tho root of all evil. But evolution as seen by men is a slow process, yet it is the method the Almighty uses in all His plans, and though tho world is, as I have said, far from what it should be and from what it will be, yet even now it is unspeakably better than it was 2000 years ago. Prohibition means revolution, and its compulsory mandates have often been enforced only to fail, both in religious and temporal affairs. Sumptuary laws were enacted in the reign of good Queen Boss, and also compulsory laws to make people religious by making them go to church. Both laws had to lie repealed. “Liberty” says that if the money spent on drink was spent in other ways and on other things tho revenue of tho State would not suffer. Quite so, for the State would see to that. But “Liberty’s” contention is that if tho drink trade was altogether done away with there would he next to no crime and consequently there would bo next to no police required and next to no gaols, industrial schools, or benevolent institutions, etc. But this is all problematical. Even if we had prohibition established as a law I am sure that ' law would be costly to administer and it would not introduce the millcnium. I would like to ask “Liberty” how he accounts for the police not being reduced in those districts in Now Zealand where prohibition is already established. Most likely “Liberty” will say that it is because drink finds its way there from non-prehibition districts. This is iust what would happen if wo had national prohibition. Drink would find its way hero from other countries whore there is no prohibition, and most, people will continue to look upon prohibition as a most arbitrary enactment. Then in regard to America, one would think by the way “Liberty” writes about prohibition there that it had long been established, whereas national prohibition is but a now thing there; and it is very questionable if it is a success for doing good as “Liberty” would like to make it out to bo. A recent telegram from Chicago reports a murder for every day in the month of June, and previous to that from tho beginning of the year there had been 170 murders committed. But most likely “Liberty” will say this story has boon concocted by some unscrupulous advocate of drink.—l am, etc., -x, Irwin. East Taieri, July SO.