PROHIBITION IN CLUTHA.

Otago Witness, Issue 2287, 30 December 1897, Page 9

PROHIBITION IN CLUTHA.

MR HAWKINS'S REPORT.

(Fbom Oub Own Correspondent.) Wellington, December 22. As so ranch iuterest is taken in the report tnade by Mr R. S. Hawkins, S.M., to the Minister for Justice on the workiDg of prohibition in Clutha district, I sand you the texfc in •full:—

Balclutha, December 8, 1897. To the Hon. the Minister for Justice.

Sir, — It haviog been my duty to administer in my capacity of Btipandiary magistrate the penal provisions of " The Licensing Acb, 1881," for the last four years within my circuit, and having, therefore, a singular experience in thin capacity of the operation of what may be termed " the prohibition provisions " of the Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Acb within the Electoral District of Clutha, I think ib fight to lay before the Government the judgment which I have formed as t,he result of that experience.

Before doing so I desire to offi-rr certain considerations, which I think are necesiry to explain the attitude of the population towards prohibition. •It is hardly to be, questioned that the Alcoholic Liquorß Sale Control Acts were the direct issue of a persistent pressure upon Parliament by an organisation of very active and zealous persons, who considered that persuasion bad totally failed to persuade th^ people to abandon the abuse Of alcoholic drink, and tlut the executive h**d tofcilly failed to regulate the sale and prevent the acknowledged abuses of the trade. Thisorg*nisation persuaded Parliament to put it in the power of any constituency to have recourse to the vio'ent means of shut Mug up all publichous' s, and of totally prohibiting all sale of alcoholic liquors within an electoral district where they could obtain a certain majority in favour of that course.

I do not think that there can be aoy doubt that Pskiliameofc in consenting to pass legislation of so drastic a nature in relation to an article of common consumption was influenced by the belief that it would be accepted and its prohibitive provisions acted upon ia a not inconsiderable number of and in not unimportant electoral districts and centres of population.

It seems incredible that if Parliament had been able to foresee that in 1897 theie would b3 only one remote electoral district, with widelyseparated small townships and a scattered agricultural and pastoral population, in which thoao provisions were to be in force, it would ever have been induced to pa?s the law.

Yet this is the fact. Twice, at an iuterval of three years, the question of the adoption or non-adopfcion oi these prohibitive provisions has been referred to the whole constituencies of the colony on a special ballot, the issues being defined in the clearest manner ; and twice have the entire constituencies of the c lony, with the siuglc exception of the Clutha district, refused to adopt them. And in the Clufcha district there has only been a vote to close the publichousos. The " no license " vote has never been cartied T think it important to pub these facts promineptly forward, bscaase they do unquestionably influence the wide public feelirjg ot antagonism to "the law which exists here. There ia a sense of injustice and of irritation arising out of the fact that that which is lawful and expedient elsewhere throughout the entire colony should be declared unlawful and inexpedient in this district. The fact that a majoriby of bbc people may have desired, and may still desire, the application of the Jaw does not appeal to the common sense of the minority as a justification for the restraint. They feel that they are the victims of an arbitrary law and of an arbitrary territorial boundary And 1 think this latter point has caused and explains the especial ill - feeling against the law which exists in the Tapauui disttict, where at the last poll' a considerable majority was oast for the issue of licenses — a majority which \T«e destrojed by votes cast ia the Waiwera district;, at the opposite end of (he constituency, and with which they have no interests in common and but little intercommunication. There always remains the fact that the consumption of alcoholic liquors is not, and until public opinion is totally changed cannot be, regarded as malum in se. Tuat it i<) neither morally bad nor inexpedient the population of the district must be natisfitd, stnee they fl >d that both Houies of Parliament regularly p->ss a sessional resolution approving the sale and consumption of alcoholic liquors within the walls of the Parlia« merit House itself. , With these general considerations I pass to thQßctual resu'bs of the application of the provbions^o tbis constituency so far»B they have come under my notice as magistrate. I append to this report schedules giving the particulars of every information laid since prohibition was carried, and what was done on those informations. r The .general result i 3 as follows :—: — •Informations ... , . ... 79 ■ Withdrawn ' 40 Dismissed „ 16 Convictions ... ... ... ... 23 Total amount of fine?, £651. Ib cannot ba said that the law has been allowed to sleep by the Ex«cutive, or that it has nob been fairly put in operation and tried. It will be observed that the first information was laid in November, 189*., The last cases rrere heard in December, 1897. Looking back on these prosecution*? and considering the position to-day, it is impossible for me to say that the sale h»s been stopped, or that any final blow has been given to the trade.

My impression is that the effects of convictions- are only temporary, and are effaced within a nob very long period of time ; that they bring about greater caution for a time till the impression weais tft\ I am quite unable to say to what extent the consumption of alcoholic liquors in the private houses of the settlers has taken the place of the pnblichouse consumption. I am assured that at first, after the closing of the licensed houses, the quantity of alcoholic liquors going in demijohns and casks into private houses was very • considerable. But I have been informed that it has since decreased

owing to the settlers finding that it was too costly, the demijohn or cask being soon exhausted .when access was constantly to be had to 'it. On the other hand, lam informed from

credible sources that liquor is to be found generally, and is offered to visitor*, in houses where before 1893 no liquor was kept. I put forward these statements with extreme diffidence. I have no " evidence " which I could bring forward myself. In all statements made to me I have to con-

sider whether my informant is a prohibitionist

or' a license advocate, and to discount the statements accordingly if he if either the one or fche other. » So far 93 to the effect on liquor con-

sumption. But I have now to go to a far more serious aspect of the case. Tha repressive measures and the penal enforcement of them have led to an open defiance of law and to a disregard of truth in the Magistrate's Cjurt, the evils of which I caianofc sufficiently dwell on and deplore.

There is hardly a case wh'ch has come before me in which the defendant has pleaded " not guilty " in. which ia my opinion there has nob been lying in the witness box. In some cases it is moat deliberate ; in all ib seems to me thab no odium attaches to it in the mind of the ordiuary public, and that resort to any practices is deemed justifiable to defeat ' what is causidered an unfair attempt to deprive the public of a right. The lying is being syabemabised ; the points to be protected are getting clearly defined ; the difficulties of the prosecution aro increasing.

In a case not long ego, if reliance is to be placed on the statements made in court by the prosecution, a deliberate conspiracy existed to get rid of witnesses and defeat the ends of justice, while hardly a case is heard in which the prosecution has not suggested that the witnesses for the prosecution have bsen tampered wibh — a suggestion which I canuofc deny appears to be well founded. I frequently arrive at a conviction by discrediting a part aud crediting other parts of the evidence of witnesses for the prosecution, and totally discrediting the witnesses for the defence.

That there is wide publ'c sympathy with the geUers and antagonism to the informers and police is unquestionable, and iv a recent case in Tapanui there is little doubt that ife w»s necessary tfaab bhe informer should be taken under police protection. Ib seems bo me thab bhe advocates of prohibition care nothing, so long as they can keep bhe publichouses closed, what; injury is done bo the respect for law or bo the cause of morality or justice — bhub bheir enbire moraliby is summed up in the words "total ab-tinenoi" and given that ruat cesium.

I do not c o regard it, aud I say that while attempting — for they only attempt — to caßb oub one devil they are bringing in seven others far worf c than the one.

There are not only the evils I have dwelt upon, but there are di-v ension and ill-will and mutual dis'rusb, and even hatred, springing up in thege litt'e townships and growing oub of this source.

It may bo said, if all this lying in court is going on, why do I not order a prosecution for perjury ? [A paragraph then follows in which the magistrate refers to a case tried before him in which he asserts that perjuty was undoubtedly committed. ]

Ib is not the first case of bhe kind within my experience, aud ib is a matter of general on dit that a conviction for perj>uy cannot be got out of an Otago or Southland jury.

Convictions for pc jury are, in ray judgment, never likely to be obtained as long as the fault is elevated into the dignity of an indictable offeree and subjects the offender to seven ye*rs' imprisonment.

When criminal -law ehall obtain due attention and rational treatment from tbe Legislature, lying in thie witness box in all matters of summary jurisdiction, and that of the Magistrate's Civil Court will be an offence punishable summarily by the stipendiary magistrate by fine and alternative imprisonment.

I have paced to the , best of ray ability my judgment on the whole position. It is for the Government bo take the responsibility of mainbaining or of 'asking Parliament to abrogate tbis'lftrr. But if Parliament declines to abrogate the law, then I think that the Executive should put on such a force as to render the breach of the law impossible, for I hold thab a continuance of the present state of things is unendurable and an evil of a character mo»t mischievous to the morality of the population of the district.

Whatevf r happens, as long as the law is in foice, I shall in the dif charge of magisterial duty vigorously enforce it. On that bead bhe Government need entertain no doubt whatever. — I have, &c, Robert S. Hawkiss.