PROHIBITION.

Thames Star, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8521, 27 November 1896, Page 4

PROHIBITION.

FURTHER ARGUMENTS IN ITS

FAVOR

The following is a condensed report of Mr Roberts' remarks at tbe Protestant Alliance Hall on Tuesday night in support of Prohibition: — The speaker first referred to tbe threefifths majority. He stated that, as a '"Democrat, he thonght it was unfair that Prohibition should be handicapped with a three fifths majority, while every other reform could be carried with a bare majority. As a Prohibitionist, however, he was prepared to accept the position , and fight the cause. The three-fifths majority might yet be more expedient in the interests of the reform they desired, for when Prohibition came to the Thames carried by a majority of three-fifths of the people, it would, ccme never more to leave them (loud app'ause). The vice qfintensperance was such ihat it rr quired ' snore-..than- persuasion to induce its ■ victims to jd'e up. drink; the drink must bo Kept from them. With Tegard to the assertion that tbe Prohibition of the traffic wonld inconvenience the travelling public, the Utter would not be inconvenienced one iota. V\ ith a passing reference to pub'icans who wou'd nnt accept boarders, Mr Robe ts proceeded to tell of instances in Onehang., Coromandel and Dunedin, in which the travelling public were better catered for in temperance hotels than by any publican- He added that the proprietor of the Roy 1 Hotel believed that the public could be better cafered for .. apart from the drinking ratoon ; hence the "private boar 'ing hru-e on the beach. Speaking on the revenue quei-tion, Mr Roberts said that tbe annual expenditure in drink in New Zealand was £2,000 GCO. It was estimated that for every £1 spent in drink, £1 was expended in coping with ita effects, and the total expet di'ureb?tha ' people was therefore £4 000,000 Out of 1 this the State got back £600,G00 in > revenue, If the trsffic was done away I with, the people would not hnve <o expend [.'£2,000,000 annually in coping with its effeotc, and on thai score could well afford to lose the £6C0,000 of Tevenue. It was a fact that no industry in exigence paid poorer wsges thin the liquor traffic, and in this resprct he compared . tbe wages total of tbe Kaiapoi Woollen Co. with that of all the brewers and bottlers throughout New Zealand. The advance in industrial production would absorb *11 *i>e labor thrown out of employment by the suppression of the traffic. In Clntha, Prohibition had been in operation, and doting the two jeaia previous to the reform being carried there were 89 cues of drunkenness and 137 of other offences; sirce tbe sdcp'ion of ProbibiI tion there 7 cases of drunkenness and 83 of other offencei. The Chairman (Rev. S. J. Serpell), in his conclttdinj? remarks, said there were three theories advanced in dealing with the drink question. The first was the passive theory, which proposed to make L the traffic absolutely unfettered, so that anyone could embark in if, and the . article would be as free as any actie'e of f commerce The sec nd theory was reguiat'n. the traffic ; the third was pro- ; hibiting it altogether. As regards the ' first thfory, no one dared to make the t "trafficjabsolu'ely unfettered ; as rega-ds i the h< cond, regulation had been con- ■ elnoirely proved «o be a failure; therefore ! it only remained for them to meet the evil ! by prohibition. If anyone bad any o'her theory or remedy to advance, then by all rne.ns let aim proclaim it. The liquor trade lived jpn ether trades, and it was the tiubltii _wbo_JiaiA»-tbe revenue; and if the £2,000,066 ea^ed by abolishing the traffic were devoted to reproductive public work?, the advantage was obvious. Tbe speaker concluded jhy pointing out the advantages of tb& 'eplony'a peoyrapbiral position in order to give Prohibition a successful trial.