The Majority Vote.

White Ribbon, Volume 2, Issue 17, 1 November 1896, Page 7

The Majority Vote.

“ License they mean when they cry Liberty."— Milton. It is curious how men and women who are fair and logical enough when discussing ordinary subjects object to a majority vote on the Licensing question, in face of the fact that all public questions are settled by a majority in this country. Even the good old Conservatives never dream of cavilling at the ruling of the majority in a general way, but take it as a matter of course excepting on this one issue. Why :s it ? Probably the objectors may be divided into two classes—those who are anxious to protect “ vested interests” at all hazards, and those who are unthinking, and repeat in parrot fashion the phrases they hear from others. Of the first class we are not so hopeful, as anything which touches the pocket is usually bitterly resented, but we would urge those who have not thought the matter out for themselves to consider how far they are justified in continuing in opposition to the constitutional method of a majority vote on this as on all other issues. Both Mr Rolleston and Mr Wason in their electoral addresses last week objected to “ Prohibition,” on the ground of its being “ a coercion of a minority by a majority,” and it is worthy of note that on no other question of legislation did

they make similar comment. If the majority vote is wrong where the Licensing Laws are concerned, then it must be wrong on all other questions. Opponents of Prohibition seem to forget that minorities are now being coerced by majorities in many districts. They are having public houses forced upon them agamst their will, with all the attendant unpleasant andhurtfulresults. The minorities are now forced to pay their share of aid to Hospitals and Charitable Ail, to Lunatic Asylums and Prisons, the need for which is largely due to the presence of the Public House. Is it any wonder that this minority should try and change itself into a majority, as they did at Clutha lately ; and is it not absurdly illogical to say that a majority in favour of Public Houses should rule, while a majority against them should not ? We are often told that had Prohibition been given its proper title, viz.» “ Local Option,” it would have had many more adherents If this is true, it only goes to prove what we have already said, that many people do not think for themselves, otherwise they would not be so strongly influenced by a mere name. We are well aware that the opponents have tried to show that “ Prohibition ” meant coercion, and subversion of personal liberty, but only a very little thought is required to see how wrong such statements are. Local Option or Prohibition means the power in the hands of the people to decide this question for themselves: than which nothing could be fairer.