THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

Otago Witness, Issue 2664, 5 April 1905, Page 30

THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

A PUBLIC DEBATE,

There is a barbaric element in all men, even the most civilised, that renders the vision of a combat to them a matter of interest. It is not the small boy alone that stops to see a dog-fight or goes to the football match, and it is easy to imagine that the world will be rather a dull place {to the non-combatants especially) when the Era of universal peace is proclaimed. Probably it was more with the object of gratifying the primitive instinct referred to than the idea of obtaining further knowledge on a phase of the temperance question "that induced a large number of persons to attend the Choral Hall on Friday evening and listen to a debate on the question of "Public Control and State Ownership of the Liquor Traffic"; for, whatever it may be eight months or so hence, interest in the question of State ownership of the Jiotels of the colony is not particularly keen just now. Perhaps, so far as last night's meeting is concerned, it is well that this is so, since if there had existed a very general and very keen desire for knowledge on- the subject there would probably have been a good deal of disappointment. The meeting, however, undoubtedly served its purpose in some respects. Those present spent a pleasant and Kappyuevening. "We got a good laugh, anyhow," said a lady as ■ she. smilingly descended to the street. Somebody else (a serious man) said it was funny, but rather farcical. And he looked a man with some judgment, too. 3»lr -Gilchrist, who occupied the chair, introduced the debaters, and in doing so said the meeting had been arranged at the instance of the Dunedin Progressive Society — z body which w«s anxious to promote education and discussion on matters of interest to the community ; hence the meeting that night and on Sunday nights. Of the two gentlemen who were to speak he need only specially introduce Mr Hogg, who -was a Socialist and believed in public ownership and control of the liquor traffic us well as of everything else. Mr Hogg, on rising, got a kind reception, and right through a good hearing. He is a Scot, not very old, fairly easy in speech, good-tempered, and in some respects rather adroit. Only a few minutes were required to indicate that the chairman's remark that Mr Hogg was a Soicalist was ao misnomer. To tell the truth, this fact wse brought just a little bit too prominently before those present, and one could sympathise a little with an individual who rose well on in the meeting and asked if Mr Hogg had not taken the debate for one on" " Socialism," instead of one on something rather different, or a good deal different It took eoine little effort on Mr Hogg's part to convince those present (if he did convince them at all) that Socialism

was bound right up with the question — that, indeed, it was the crux of the whole matter. No" one, said Mr Hogg in his opening- remarks, regretted- the evils of the drink " traffic more than did Socialists, and many were more anxious for reform. But they looked at the matter from a different standpoint from the prohibitionists. They saia, banish, dri»k and you will banish poverty; .Socialists said, banish poverty and you- will banish the evils of the traffic. Before drunkenness could be wiped out ...they must revolutionise the social movement of the people. In any case it was questionable if temperance would benefit the people if it 'became universal. The man who was temperate could only hold an advantage -when a number was not. Supposing, however, the community as a whole did become temperate and better profitproducing machines as a result, the few shillings extra wages that might possibly be earned by them would, under the present system, only be swallowed up in increased rent and interest and profit, which "* always ensued when conditions improved. He maintained that a great many persons abandoned themselves to drink simr>]y to induce forgetfulness of their miserable

Bxistence.

The thing essential for improve-

ment was not prohibition, but Socialism. "So far as temperance was concerned, the Jews of Whiteohapel, Germans, Spaniards, »nd Indians either drank less than Britishers or did not drink at all, but they all had a flower standard of living than the people of Britain. Wherever prohibition had been tried it had failed, and in New Zealand it was remarkable that with the growth of the prohibition sentiment the drink bill of the colony should have gone up. He submitted that if the people desired to control the liquor traffic they should have the power; and that the municipilisation of the traffic and the resultant elimination of private profit would achieve reform far more successfully than prohibition ever would. — (Applause.) - Mr Bedford said it would have been better

if the issues of the debate had been pro-

perly defined. Mr Hogg had devoted a lot «*of time to deploring the conditions of modern life He deplored them just as deeply, but joined issue with Mr Hogg ■when lie made the statement that prohibitionists claimed that the abolition of the traffic would bt- a panacea for all the evils society was heir to. A prominent Socialist in Wellington had said that 14 per cent, of the property existing was due to drink. They, the prohibitionists, said this to Socialists : Give us a hand to get rid of

this H per C3nt. and then we will help you to get rid of the 86 per cent, afterwards. They never argued that prohibition itsetf would bring about the millenium, but they would say that with a eober community they would get the reforms that Mr Hogg was flesirous of bringing about far more quickly than with a large proportion afflicted with drunkenness. So far as trying to secure reforms other tha a those associated with the drink traffic", he wanted to know if .prohibitionists were the only section in the 'community that should work for them. He believed that tl»y had done as much as anyone else. All thooe who favoured State control attributed the evils of the traffic to private interest, but ho desired to point out what men did not drink because the publican asked them. " Shouting " was far more, responsible for. excess than private ownership. — (Applause.) Bellamy's was a place where the matter of private profit did not occur, where the liquors were of the best, and where no one was pressed to drink. Yet had there been- no cases of excessive drinking there? Men drank to excess because they had a craving for it, and hotels, whether owned privately or not, developed that craving. All the laws and regulations made for the conduct of a State-owned hotel oould not keep a man from getting drunk some

way or other. — (Applause.) Quoting the statement of Mr John Burns that, with increased prosperity came increased drinking. Mr Bedford said herein was to be found the cause of tho heavier drink bill of New Zealand during the last few years. As to poverty causing drink, it was a fact that, relatively speaking, the rich people in a community spent more money in drink than the "" poor. So far as prohibition in America^ was concerned, it semed strange that Maine should continue to keep it if it were a failure. They had proof at their own doors, however, that prohibition was not a failure. It was not necessary to go abroad for evidence. — (Applause.) Mr Hogg, in his reply, said Mr Bedford had gone all round the subject — (laughter), — that he had appealed to them to save the 14- per cent, and let the 86 per cent, perish — (Cries of "No, no"), — and really all that Mr Bedford had said had borne out what he (Mr Hogg) contended. Both he and Mr Bedford desired to reach the same end — a sober people. The shortest way was State control ; the longest prohibition, which was repressive, not reformative. — (" Hear, hear.") In Russia, where State control had been adopted, the consumption of liquor ■ had fallen by nine million gallons. By poverty and the people he did not mean only material poverty, but mental and physical. If production was put on the basis of use and not profit, the standard of health and everything would be raised, and there would be less drinking. Bellamy's and working men's clubs was State control travestied. At Newton Grange, in Scotland, where private profit was eliminated , from the public-houses there, they had a sober and prosperous community. ( — Ap- . plausc.) ■ j Mr Bedford said he- had no objection to ; a. referendum on the subject if it were shown it was really wanted. Russian figures were unreliable — (laughter), — and he preferred districts in the colony — Clutha, where the people endorsed their prohibition votes by increased majorities; Bruce, and~ Mataura, which next door to Clutha followed its lead, As to coercion, he thought the Socialists were pretty fond of that. — (Laugrhter and -applause.) The thing resolved itself, however, into restraining the liberty of the individual for the sake of tho community, and Socialists could not quarrel with that. Counter attractions to bars were all very well, but when the bar door was open somehow a lot of persons did not get to the .. attractions.— (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) After Mr Hogg ha-d again replied, declaring that prohibitionists were fighting non-essentials, and capitalism was the real enemy of society, and had finally wound up ' with somewhat of a peroration, deputing a society happy under the regime of socialism. Questions were asked of the debaters, most of them to Mr Hogg, who replied not unreadily, once or twice smartly, and always with g-ood temper. The proceedings then concluded with a vote of thanks to both gentlemen. (