LOCAL OPTION POLL.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIV, Issue 824, 21 December 1905, Page 37

LOCAL OPTION POLL.

From the New Zealand /'Times” the following interesting interviews are reprinted :— VIEWS OF PEOPLE INTERESTED. The Rev. R. S. Gray, of Christchurch, a prominent prohibition worker, speaking of the results of the local option poll, said that as to the Ashburton vote, he was of opinion that the local prohibitionists had perhaps under-esti-mated the fighting , strength of the enemy, and from their vantage ground thought themselves more secure than they were. He thought that this would probably be the case in Chalmers and Newtown, and Bruce also. The Ashburton Club vote was also an important factor, the 600 members having doubtless resented the removal of their charter. The party, while disappointed, were certainly not disheartened. The cause had gained by the reduction vote carried in several places, and the elect orates added, viz., Invercargill, Oamaru, and Grey Lynn. The steadily growing votes over the whole colony were surely no sign of defeat. “The best sentiment of the Colony is with us, and, although the fight is a stern one, we are out to win, and shall quickly and confidently set our hand to preparation for the next contest.” COLONIAL OPTION. The president of the Timaru Mo-Li-cense League, Rev. T. Stinson, says :— “There is no accounting for the comparative falling-off in the no-license vote in Canterbury ; nor for the percentage of advance in the colony being less than at the previous poll. It has been suggested that the heavier poll in Timaru brought to the booths a class of people who held aloof from it last election, and who were not likely to vote no-license. There might be something in that. But we shall not be discouraged. We did our best and we shall continue the campaign.” Mr Stinson said he would prefer to work for colonial option but until that was provided for by the Legislature, temperance reformers must make what use they could of the local option law, looking to the importance of the example provided by districts that do vote themselves “dry.” AWARUA’S VOTE. Mr Bernard Nicholls, organising agent for Otago for the New Zealand Alliance, said, looking at the results straight off, the most surprising thing to him was that Awarua did not carry No-license. It was confidently expected that it would. Then there was the failure at Caversham, where the publicans themselves had practically almost given up hope. No proposal has been carried. They were gratified to find that Clutha had increased its vote against restoration, casting 277 more votes for No-li-cense, and the vote for restoration going up only 97. The failure at Chalmers ■can hardly be deemed astonishing, in view of the enormnus task set the Nolicense party. COMMON-SENSE TOLERATION. The Rev Mr Thomson, the representative of the trade, claims that a victory has been gained for common-sense toleration. He thinks that men and women have begun to realise that No-license does not mean the promotion of temperance, and that they have seen that in the effort to put down drunkenness by No-license, other and greater evils have taken its place, such as sly grogging, and the development of the vices of deceit and hypocrisy. “No-license” as a remedial measure, therefore, stands condemned. The unwise and unchristian tactics of the “No-license” advocates did much to destroy their own work. Port Chalmers had a taste of No-license, and it was not good On being offered its choice again, it wisely rejected it.