LIQUOR TRADE TACTICS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9273, 27 June 1908, Page 4

LIQUOR TRADE TACTICS.

ANOTHER EXPOSURE." The "Trade" fears the triumph of Nolicense in Oamaru and circulates falsehoods to try and throw doubts on the manifesto signed by the Mayor and 100 leading citizens. About four weeks ago a Press Association telegram published throughout New Zealand announced that the Mayor of Oamaru and 100 of the leading citizens, including all the doctors, headmasters of the schools and most of the builders and the president and secretary of the Chamber of Commerce had signed a manifesto stating (1) that any statements asserting s that nolicense had hindered progress and that the town financially had suffered because of it were contrary to fact ; (2) property had advanced in value; (3) rates had been reduced 3d in the £ owing to the increase of revenue from all sources; (4) business had decreased in 1907 owing to the drought, but quickly recovered and was now very good ; (5) more houses had been erected last year than in any recent year; (6) crime had decreased greatly, the convictions being 442 and 142 for the eighteen-monthly periods preceding and following no-license respectively; (7) drunkenness was rare in the streets and at public gatherings. No challenge was made of this definite evidence as to the signal success of no-license in Oamaru until the publication in your columns on June 16 of an anonymous statement inserted as an advertisement. It is significant that the anonymous statement referred to was published a few days after the local secretary of the Licensed Victuallers' Association visited Oamaru, but it is more significant that the statement did not merit either his signature or that of any Oamaru citizen. Although the alleged reply to the Mayor and citizens' definite pronouncement in favour of no-licenoa was obviously the measure of the liquor traffic's dread of the destructive effect the Oamaru experience is likely to have on trade interests in December next, it merits reply because of its insolent perversion of facts and the breezy disregard for the truth displayed by its author. As president of the Christchurch Prohibition League, I forwarded the liquor traffio's anonymous reply to his official testimony, and asked him to say if there was any truth in its assertion. I have pleasure in appending his reply. To any reasonable man it will afford convincing proof of the liquor traffio's .mendacity. T. E. Taylor, Esq., Ohristchurch. Dear Sir, — I am in receipt of your letter of 16th inst referring to an article which appeared in the "Lyttelton Times" and the Christchurch "Press," dealing with published replies of mine to certain questions submitted by the Rev. Thos. Stinson, of Timaru, in regard to the condition of Oamaru under no-license, ! and ; you ask me to what extent the article is reliable, and particularly as to the truth of the statement relating to borough finances. May I say that in the replies to Mr Stinson, while stating facts, I was careful to say nothing that could be regarded as in any sense biassed. So much was this so that the " Oamaru Mail " subsequently commenting upon the replies, said " Nor must it be thought that the Mayor said all he could have said. That he has been mild in his facts and terminology must not be taken to mean that he had a weak case.. He wanted to be judicial, that was all, and he so excelled himself in the effort that he was colourless when he might have been more pronounced." The article you refer to sa^s that the manifesto has " attracted a storm of controversy, of affirmation and denial, and of blast and counter blast." Now, apart from some letters written to the "North Otago Daily Times" by one or two anonymous visitors, I am not aware of any controversy over the matter. Certainly no local resident — with a single possible exception — has publicly challenged anything I said. And I may add that the absence of criticism by Oamaru people was particularly gratifying to me as showing a practically unanimous endorsement of the statements I made. With all due respect to the Christchurch writer, I think "the true position of the town" is better known to the people who reside in it than the casual visitors. .^ Now in regard to Borough Finances it is stated that the reduction recently made in the rates was really part of a rate of 6d in the £ imposed some four or five years ago for special purposes, and never since removed. This statement is quite contrary to fact. The rate of 6d referred to existed for three years only, and was removed four years ago, that of 3d in the £ just taken off being quite a separate and additional reduction. Then, again, it is stated that in order to make up the deficiency caused by the last reduction in rates the " Council proposes to curtail the expenditure," etc. As a matter of fact, the proposed expenditure of (in round figures) £19,000 for the current year is about £600 in excess of the actual expenditure of last year. ••' I may say, in regard to the increase of wages to the Council's employees, that increases were made some months previously, and the Council, on the recommendation of the Finance Committeej resolved to adopt the principle of revising the wages of all the staff only at the end of each financial year. I have no doubt the increases applied for will be granted in due course. It is true that a smaller amount of rates is now received in respect io hotels that were previously licensed. For the whole town, however, a very substantial increase in the valuations of property has taken place, and a larger revenue has been received from gas, water supplies, rents, etc. I may say, in conclusion, that the statements I made regarding the condition of the town — ita prosperity, its steady progress, . thfc great diminution of crime that hal taken place — are based, on facts that cannot be other than pleasing toJßvery loyal citizen. — Faithfully yomgW ROBERT MILLIGAN, 1 pKSK