ONTARIO AND BEER.

Te Aroha News, Volume XLI, Issue 6604, 26 May 1925, Page 5

ONTARIO AND BEER.

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—The cable announcing the sale of 4.4 per cent, beer in Ontario after an era of prohibition will mislead those not in possession of the facts. May I crave the courtesy of your space, in fairness to Ontario, and give the facts ? The Ontario Temperance Act prohibited the import and sale of intoxicating beverages. It could not prohibit manufacture because of the dominion law. Hence six distilleries and 29 breweries were kept in operation manufacturing ostensibly for export. This kept in being powerful interests desirous of breaking down the Act. The Act permitted the sale of beer of approximately 2 per cent, alcohol. In October last the people of Ontario were asked to vote to decide whether they desired to retain the Ontario Temperance Act or whether they wished the Government sale of iiciuor. Your columns recorded that, despite its imperfections, the people had voted to retain the Act—-the majority was 33,915. Before the poll, the Premier (Mr Ferguson) said: “The Government would treat it as

[ any other piece of legislation, and would strengthen its weakness, if any, that might be revealed from time to time, and give it active and vigorous enforcement.” That was the definite pledge given to the people if they voted to retain the Act. Well, they did vote to retain it, and after the poll the Premier said: “Yesterday’s pronouncement shows that the majirrity of those voting favour the continuance of the Ontario Temperance Act. . . . The popular vote will be recognised and accepted. . . . The Government- will use its best efforts to ,give it sufficient enforcement.” Secure in his Parliamentary majority, the Premier has introduced legislation authorising the sale of beer of 4.4 per cent, alcohol—equal in strength to New Zealand beer. This beer is described in the Bill ds non-intoxicat-ng, but the same Bill forbids its sale bo those under 18 years of age. Why, if it is non-intoxicating? This is what the Premier calls “recognising” and “accepting” the popular vote that beer exceeding about 2 per cent, alcohol shall not be sold. The voters have no remedy until Mr Ferguson’s term of office expires. Before the poll the liquor party boasted that they would have a majority of 100,000 for Government sale. They did not get it. The French wine interests announced that they had sent literature and funds for the purpose of capturing Ontario, and that it would be captured. It was not captured. But the Premier has flouted tfie popular vote, and in direct defiance of it legalised the sale of intoxicating drink. Your readers may be left to draw their own conclusions as to what influences have been at work to cause such a thing as this to come to pass under British political conditions. I doubt if there is, in the annals of our political institutions, any episode more unsavoury, it be the reintroduction of the sale of beer by the glass in British Columbia when the province voted against it. It is an unwelcome sight to see two Canadian provincial premiers thus dishonouring our British Parliamentary conditions. —I am, etc.,

J. MALTON MURRAY.