Tuapeka Times AND GOLDFIELDS REPORTER AND ADVERTISER. SATURDAY, JUNE 29, 1895. "MEASURES, NOT MEN."

Tuapeka Times, Volume XXV, Issue 4253, 29 June 1895, Page 2

Tuapeka Times AND GOLDFIELDS REPORTER AND ADVERTISER. SATURDAY, JUNE 29, 1895. " MEASURES, NOT MEN."

The tenacity with which large classes of people hold to prohibition in the face ol ropeated proofs of its in efficacy to change the habits of a community, to destroy a desire that haa grown and ripened with the centuries, deserves to be classed as one of thß' l marvels of the age. The balance of evidence in those parts of America where prohibition has had a long and an exhaustive trial, with every influence on its side that could conduce to its success, decisively proves its failure as an agency of moral reform. It has a strong and a direct tendency to foster the growth of hypocrisy and deceit and bring the law into contempt and disrepute. The experience of prohibition during the brief period of its operation in the Clutha distriot muse establish this , fact in the minds of all who are eapablt

of observing carefully and thinking dispassionately and without prejudice. Physical force, coercion and the strong hand are always a proof of the failure of moral agencies, and where moral agencies fail the cases iv which violence or repression succeed are very rare indeed. And this is still more likely to be so when such vile services as may be rendered by spies and informers are enlisted on behalf of a law already regarded by large numbers as intolerable and oppressive. Those whom it is the purpose of such a law to reform refuse to submit to any restraint from outside, while those — and their number in every community is always the largest — who can by the exercise of their own will, control and regulate their desires feel,and with reason, that they are the victims of undeserved tyranny, the worst and most unendurable of all tyrannies, the tyranny of a minority, which they are very unlikely to submit to. Thus it is that prohibition arouses opposition and creates allies on the side of those who are opposed to State interference of any kind or in any degree on this question that trenches on personal liberty. It is no doubt harsh and undeserved to speak of those who give themselves up to the advocacy of prohibition as fanatics ; but we believe nothing less than a fanatical spirit — something akin to religious fanaticism — would be strong enough to impel people into such a palpably wild extravagance, and blind them to the injustice, the fruitless injustice, too, which would follow the temporary realisation of their dream.

The London " Times " recently published an article showing how Cardiff had been effected by the Sunday Closing Act, which came into operation in Wales twelve years ago. It was at that time represented to Parliament that the vast majority of the people of Wales were in favor of the absolute closing of the publichouses on Sunday. Parliament was impressed by the solid front presented by the Welsh representatives, and by the mass of petitions they presented, and accordingly tho Sunday Closing Act came into operation. No sooner had Sunday closing taken effect than a spirit of impatience and irritation manifested itself. This feeling of resentment appears to have grown and spread into open revolt, and before many years had passed the Act was evaded in a flagrant and wholesale manner. The magistrates confirmed the deduction of the public that any person who had travelled three miles from the place where he slept on Saturday night was entitled to be served with drink, and on the three-mile limit drinking grew rampart. The Sunday trains from Swansea carried thousands of people to the outlying villages, and these trains are now known by the sobriquet of " drunkards' traips." One result was that the character and morals of many a quiet village were changed. .In the populous towns the effects are even worse, because evasions are more organised and far-reaching. Workmen's clubs sprang up so rapidly and to such an extent that in a spasm of righteousness the Cardiff police suppressed two hundred of them in a comparatively short time. Then people took to selling beer surreptitiously, au evil far worse in character ; and it is calculated that there are now about one thousand shebeens flourishing in Cardiff alone. One result of this is a great increase of drunkenness among women. A better class of workingmen's clubs has recently sprung up, and at twenty-one of these institutions on a Sunday not long since a census was taken, when it was found that ten thousand persons had entered them and been served with drink. On the same day four thousand walked over the border into the neighboring county of Monmouthshire, where Sunday trading does not apply, while several thousands more must have been entertained in the one thousand shebeens, which the restrictive law had called into existence. Thus we see in a town of about 150,000 souls some twelve or fifteen thousand people set out during the day with the intention of evading a legislative measure granted at the request of a unanimous nation. The stipendiary magistrate at Aberdare and Merthyr, two populous centres in Wales, declared that not only had not the Sunday closing diminished Sunday drinking, but it had developed, if not created, in men a desire to evade the law, a spirit of chicanery and deceit, which he described as " derogatory to the character of the Welsh people." But is not the experience the same out here ? Has the closing of the publichouses diminished Sunday drinking in the large cities and in the towns in this colony ? Is not the vigilance of the Police circumvented and defeated and is not liquor sold almost as freely as on any other day of the week ? Prohibitionists in this colony insist that a rigorous application of the law will prove effectual in suppressing slygrog selling. Let us see what its effect has heen in Wales. The penalties provided for such an offence are £50 for the first offence, or one month's imprisonment; £100 or two months for the second offence, and three months or £100 for the third offence. In every instance the maximum penalty is inflicted, and though more than 90 per cent, of those convicted go to jail, Sunday shebeening is as rampant as ever. And not only are illicit sellers punished but the buyers are treated with the same severity, all who are found in shebeens being brought* before a magistrate and fined or sent to jail. What does all this show ? Does it not conclusively prove that in a matter affecting the likes and dislikes and customs of a people it is wrong to place even a small minority at the mercy of a majority P Does it not also prove that prohibition does not prohibit — that it creates new desires and strengthens old or existing ones ? That it engenders new forms of vice and produces evils I more destructive of public morality and the material well-being of the people than does the evil it proposes to cure. Besides, no majority should have the power to interfere with the personal liberty and convenience of minorities, and the evil will be worse where the minorities are considerable. All attempts, so experience everywhere has proved, to reduce drunkenness by coercive legislation have failed. Suppression is impossible, but rtjg'ulation is not only possible but wise. It is clearly far better and more wholesome to keep til© drink traffic in its legitimate channels than to divert it into sly-grog shanties and into the homes of the people. That reasonable liberty in this ajS in all other matters affecting the rational likes and dislikes and customs of a people is better than oppression is proved by a comparison of results in those places where both systems have been tried. " With the one, as under the Gothenburg system, for instance, there ■

is sobriety, good order and respect for the law ; under the other, as in the prohibition States of America,there is hatred and defiance of the law, trick and chicanery and drunkenness under the most demoralising conditions. The course which the Rosebery Government decided to follow on the occasion of their defeat on a detail in the Army Estimates has received no satisfactory explanation from the cables during the last few days. Mr Balfour is stated to have blamed Sir William Harcourt for refusing to dissolve Parliament and go to the country, and Mr Gladstone is said to hold the same opinion. Of course there is a settled tactical purpose in handing over the Government to the Unionists instead of dissolving. That the Liberals feared an immediate appeal to the country seems clear ; and to onlookers at a distance the only plausible explanation of their decision is that they hope to be allowed time to close up their ranks and consolidate their strength and, at the same time, endeavor to discredit the new Administration with the country. Whether they will succeed in accomplishing this, however, is quite another question. Mr Balfour, addressing his constituents at Manchester within the last few days, declared that a dissolution was the sole issue at present, and warned the Opposition that if they delayed the appeal they would be compelled to resume office. This indicates a determination on the part of the Salisbury Government to precipitate the struggle in the country, refusing either to expose themselves to unnecessary defeat or . humiliation or to grant time for preparation to their disorganised opponents. On the other hand,the advantage which the possession of the Treasury Benches must give the Unionists in the contest, which is expected to take place within a month, can hardly he estimated. The state of the Liberal Party may be understood from the cabled announcement that they still require 170 candidates in order to be in a position to contest the constituencies. The position assigned Mr Chamberlain in the new Cabinet must cause considerable surprise. He appears to have been offered the War Department, but he declined it and requested instead the position of Secretary of State for the Colonies. " The Times" endeavors to explain, or rather excuse, his action by saying he is actuated by a desire to draw the colonies closer to the Mother Country. There is little or no opportunity either for iniative or the display of such administrative ability as Mr Chamberlain is admitted to possess in the transaction of the routine business of the Colonial Office. It is principally reserved for old and veteran statesmen, who have spent themselves in the service of the Party and not for young statesmen in the front rank, of great business capacity and bold and striking personality. There are great reforms pending in the War Department, and if Mr Chamberlain has refused the great prize offered him it is because he is not in touch with the politics of the Government, and is fearful of being brought into conflict with the Party with whom he has taken sanctuary because of his strange but bitter repulsion to Home Rule.