CONTROL OF LIQUOR.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, 17 July 1930, Page 3

CONTROL OF LIQUOR.

CANADA’S EXPERIMENT. INVESTIGATION OF THE SYSTEM. (By T.C.L.) The operation of the liquor laws in Canada and the United States interested the New Zealand Press delegates during their recent visit not a little. So much had been heard for and against generally from interested and biassed parties, that they were anxious to see things for themselves, obtain first-hand information and form their own Judgment upon a matter which is of some importance to New Zealand. In this they were accorded ready assistance and facilities by the Prime Ministers downwards to the bar tenders and counter (or table) frequenters. Liquor control is not a Federal matter in Canada as it is in the United States, where it is written into the constitution and can only be expunged with great difficulty and by a twothirds majority of the constituent States. Each province manages it in the way that suits itself and its conditions. For instance, British Columbia has a different system from its neighbours in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario, but only in detail. The broad principles are the same. In Quebec, however, there are wider departures. The main principle of all the systems is the elimination of private interest in the sale of liquor and the substitution therefor of control by an independent commission set up by the Government. During the war prohibition of liquor was enacted by the provinces mentioned, with the exception of Quebec. In each case the majorities were decisive. But having tried it the public were disappointed with the results and decided to reinstate the sale of liquor under strict State control This took the form of Issuing a license to those desiring to purchase spirituous liquor, and establishing depots at convenient points where it could be obtained. The license costs from two to three dollars. As the license-holder buys his bottles details of the purchase are -marked on the back of the license. By this means a record is held of his purchases, and, should he buy more than what appears necessary or good for him, then the police may make inquiries and ask him for an explanation as to what he is , doing with the liquor—if he is disposing of it elsewhere after hours or drinking to excess. The result may be that Ills license is revoked, and he is left in the same position as the prohibited person in New Zealand. Rules of Beer Parlours. In addition to liquor depots there are in most of the provinces beer parlours, where anyone with or without a permit may buy beer or wine, but it has to be bought by the bottle, not by the glass. These parlours are generally open from 8 to 6. In addition a license holder may buy beer by the dozen bottles from the brewery. The prices for beer are higher than in New Zealand, but those for wines are lower. For spirituous liquors, however, the rates are between 50 and 60 per cent, higher than in our Dominion. The provinces take the view that if people want spirits they should be prepared to pay heavily for them, and consume them in their own homes and not in the j | >lic bars Naturally the profits are 1 i h and the system yields considerable revenue to the Governments, which devote it to the upkeep of hospitals, schools, orphanages and similar institutions. The Federal Government imposes a heavy excise duty on all liquor. The Provincial Governments are seeking to abolish or decrease these heavy duties, as they hold they are entitled to &11 the profits arising from the consumption of liquor in their own provinces. The open bar, or saloon as it is known both in Canada and the United States, has gone for ever in both countries, so all sections emphatically declare. It was subject to so much abuse in the old days that it would never be tolerated again. Gone also is private interest in the sale of liquor, which was responsible for this abuse. The System of Quebec. In Quebec the system differs in some essentials. . Hotels are licensed to sell beer and wines by the bottle, to be consumed on the premises. The license fee is round about £2OO per annum. Anyone over 21 years of age can buy the liquor, and no individual licenses are required. But the hotels are not permitted to sell spirituous liquors, which are under the direct control of the Liquor Commissioners, who have depots in the centres where people holding licenses (for which they pay two dollars) may obtain whisky, gin or any other “hard tack.” The prices here, as elsewhere, are very stiff, and it is no wonder that the Province makes millions of dollars profit each year out of the system. Last year they were about eight millions. Public men here, however, admit that their system is deficient in that beer and wine is retailed by licensed hotels; they desire the State to be in full charge. The French predominate in this province, and because of their influence only a compromise was possible at the time the system was altered, but there are strong hopes it will be remodelled in the near future along the lines of the system of the neighbouring provinces. As it is working out in Canada State control is quite unlike what most of us conceived it to be. We had thought it would be subject to the subterranean engineering and jerrimandering associated with other systems of State control; and State interference in business is anathema to most commercial men. In Canada, however, they have removed the control from the arena of politics or the possibility of political interference, and placed it in the hands of three commissioners of high personal standing and proved business ability and given them full powers to conduct the sale of liquors on strict business lines. Each Parliament has enacted its own system and issued its own regulations, and under them the commissioners work. They have evidently gained the confidence of the public, for throughout the whole of this vast country we never heard a complaint against their administration, but only warm praise. Now as to the results. One can say without hesitation they are most successful. Liquor is not obtruded in hotels, where, indeed, you cannot obtain it unless by illicit means, such for instance, as by offering a substantial premium to a porter or waiter. “Hard” liquor that used to cause all the trouble under the open saloon system has to be consumed in the home, and the ordinary man does not drink to excess and make a beast of himself in his own home. “Soft” liquor, beer and wine, is available within reasonable hours to those requiring it. The issue of licenses enables the authorities to maintain a strict supervision over individual consumption, though one heard of no excess of zeal or undue interference in the liberty of the subject In this connection. The possibility of abuse is obviated because there is no incentive on the part of the staff in the beer parlours or depots to sell more than is good for the purchaser. They receive a salary, and it is immaterial to them whether the sales are great or small. There is no

after hours trade, except in the rare cases of the “blind pigs,” or “speakeasies” that may sell adulterated liquor at exorbitant prices late at night when the parlours or depots are closed. The profits are returned to the people, and are not the prerogative of a very small section of the community. But the greatest value of the Canadian systems is the phychological one. Under prohibition one section of the community said to the other: “You shall not drink fermented liquor.” The other replied: “What right have you to tell me what I shall drink? Prohibition law or no law. I shall get liquor.” And he did. generally very bad liquor and very expensive. Every city was full of bootleggers who did a thriving business. The young men and women, simply because the fruit was forbidden, took to the flasks, and no dance or party was complete without liquor. Business men said they could not do business without a supply of liquor on their premises for customers, and travellers expected it as a preliminary to doing business. Now that liquor can be obtained under the law, there is no necessity for keeping supplies, and none asked for it. It is at the depots if it is required; in other words, it is in its place under legal supervision. The commercial community and others in responsible positions now feel it their duty to observe the law and play the game, for they believe it is a good law and that it should be respected. Effect of Prohibition. A curious effect of the prohioition law was related by the president of the Canadian Associated Chambers of Commerce. They have strict game ' laws in Canada, and every decent ■ sportsman observes them strictly. But during the reign of prohibition they were ruthlessly broken by men who were regarded as good sportsmen. The same disrespect for the laws was observed in other directions. The flaunting of the liquor laws was not confined to the irresponsible and lawless elements, but was common to all sections of the community. Consequently the whole social fabric of the country was being weakened and undermined. That was wiiy so many temperance and other social workers welcomed a change in the liquor laws. In Alberta prohibition was carried by the adult franchise by over 60,000 votes. After from six to seven years of so-called prohibition, State control was carried by over 75,000; this by the help of the women, who by this time had secured the franchise. One ladies’ social organisation in the city of Calgary, who had previously worked hard for prohibition, gave its full weight to bring about its reversal and substituting State control. The husband of the president said the change was entirely due to the dire social effects of prohibition. In Canada one never heard any expressions of dissatisfaction with the principles of the present system; but with some of its details, yes. On the other hand, satisfaction with and praise of the system were general. They had tried private control of liquor and found it full of abuse and moral and physical degeneration. In order to rid themselves of these bad features and results they brought into force prohibition, which proved a failure. Then they resorted to State control, which is yielding all the results they hoped for. The Canadian experiences and experiments are valuable to the rest of the world, particularly to New Zealand, where they have not been impartially presented, and therefore are not understood. When they are the public may look at the vexed subject of liquor control from a new angle and refuse to be Influenced into support--1 ing extremists on the one side and vested interests on the other.