THE ALLIANCE CONGRESS.

White Ribbon, Volume 20, Issue 229, 18 July 1914, Page 1

THE ALLIANCE CONGRESS.

, Held in Wellington, July 24th to 26th. The Congress, held in Wellington. mark' an important epoch in the history cf the Alliance. The interesting function on the ( losing day, so long looked forward to, the March on Parliament, would alone have sufficed to make the occasion unique; the spirit and atmosphere that predominated throughout made it still more so. For right through, from the early breakfast at the \.M.C.A. down to the final scenes on Friday afternoon, there was the same note of earnest hopefulness for the future. It rang through all the breakfast speeches, and could be more or less distinctly heard through the most animated discussions. Speaker after speaker referred to the rapid progress being made all over the world by the Temperance movement, so that New Zealand may yet fail to attain the proud distinction of leading the world in National Prohibition. Her action is being closely watched all over the world, and especially in Australia, where the* battle is fought very largely’ by help of the statistics in New Zealand, and this should entourage .ill to the most strenuous efforts, since every’ vote cast here for Prohibition is, we are told, a vote cast for the whole world. Another feature that marked the Congress was the moderate tone it adopted in making its demands from Parliament. Much time was spent in discussing the exact form of the Memorial to be presented, but

throughout there was an excellent spirit. (ireat differences of opinion, it is true, at times and opinions strongly held and vigorously expressed, but an honest endeavour to see things from the “other man’s” point of view, and loyal support given to the decisions of Congress. The President, followed by Mr A. S. Adams, pleaded earnestly for unity of policy, and for loyalty in maintaining it with a single eye for the purpose of the Congress, and their pleading was not in vain. The final form assumed by the Memorial not only set out clearly the economic loss entailed on the country by the drinking habit, and on the other hand the consistent advance made in the vote for Prohibition election after election, but maintained the moral obligation binding all to observe their pledges inviolate, and with commendable moderation made the reasonable demand that the reduction of the present handicap on the lines of the Licensing Bill already submitted to Parliament. One other feature of the Congress should be noted, the prominence given to the condition of the King Country. In the evening session of 1 hursdav opportunity was given to the two Maori chiefs present to describe the evils from which their people suffered through the failure on the part of the Government to get the licensing law, as it applied to the King Country, faithfully administered. Very pathetic were their appeals to their European brothers to help them obtain justice, as they pointed out that with very few exceptions all the natives concerned were earnestly desirous of keeping liquor out of their district, If

the Congress by its deliberation' h h to secure improvement in this single point, its members may feel amply repaid for any time and trouble expended. Among the many interesting pap« rs read by various members of the Congress, that given by Mr H. I). Bedford stands easily Old members declared that it reached high-water mark of Congress papers, that nothing had ever been contributed more lucid in style*, more convincing in argument, more calculated to throw light on the somewhat difficult question of the economic s of labour. Mr Bedford said: — “The economic aspect of the question has been much neglected; we now need to show our arguments and prove how the liquor traffic injures >ociety in its financial resources. Ihe sole fund from which capital, labour, and land get remuneration is the total quantity of products and services throughout the year. We must not think of it in terms of money, and we shall then get a better understanding of the matter. There is no money circulating except by way of pocket money. 1 have spoken to bank managers, and 1 am assured that when money goes out on Saturday for wages, it is nearly all ba< k by the following Tuesday or Wednc-day. 1 here is a constant tendency for the money to come into town from the country, and every now and again it ha' to be sent bac k under escort. You will not increase the amount of clothing or food by increasing the amount of money. The only increase of wealth possible is the increase in the total product of the country.

“Now I will >how that there are three ways in which the liquor traffic affects the fund of comrm dities or things that can be consumed. I will prove, first, th.it it lessens the quantity of the fund ; second, that it impairs the quality; and third, that it disturbs it> just distribution.

“First, it lessens the quantity of the fund. Take as an example a farmer, who, if he is a good workman, adds to the fund, we will suppose five tons of grain. If he gives way to drunkenness, he neglects his farm, so that it does not yield so much, for neglect of work always means a lessening product; so instead of adding to the national fund of commodities of

grain, he puts in, say, only one ton. Whatever he puts into the fund he estimates its value, and says to himself, ‘1 will take out from the fund an equal value.’ Hut he takes it out in the form of clothes or boots or timber, and if he has not put so inuih in, he cannot take out so much value, and that he is the chief one to suffer is seen in h.s home; his wife will find that she cannot obtain enough sup plies of food and clothing, and his home will be pooler. Hut he i> not the only sufferer. The general community also suffers, and all is affected. For the good farmer who puts in the live tons can make a demand from the luiui for an equivalent value of goods, and as thus more boots or more clothes are wanted, a stimulus is at once given to trade, and a greater demand is < reated in all the other industries. Illustrate this by a bootmaker: if he drinks, he does not produce so many boots, and there is a shortage of supply, and also there is a lessened demand for goods. Thus, shrinkage of production implies a lessened demand in ail industries.

“So if we can abolish the effect of the liquor traffic on the producing power, trade will increase. In 1912, according to police records, there were from forty to fifty thousand people who had their capacity for producing impaired. Faking that there are about a quarter of a million producers in the Dominion, if forty to fifty thousand of them have their earning capacity reduced by one-third, then there is a decrease of 12 per cent, in the amount that is put into the national fund. The same eli«ct is produced by shortage of crops, the fund is lessened, and there is therefore iess to divide. Now, the liquor traffic has exactly the same effect as

the failure of crops. Look at what i' being done in the United States. They will not employ men who drink, nor will they have them in the Army or Navy, because drink lessens their working power, and therefore their producing power. “Second, the liquor traffic impairs the quality of the fund of commodities All sorts of things go into the fund. What does the trade put into it? A certain quantity of beer, -'pints, etc. Now the most fatal and Injurious of the products put into the fund is alcohol. Whatever goes in it.' place mu't be better, therefore, if less alcohol is put in and more of other products, the quality of the whole mu't be improved. So far. we have arrived at the- point that prohibition must increase the quantity of the fund of wealth out of which wages can alone be paid, and that it must enrich the* quality of that wealth. These results 111 themselves would be a great economic gain to the labourer, even if the distribution of that fun i were unaffected by prohibition. “I have now to show, however, that in the sphere of di'tribution the influence of the trade is peculiarly injurious to the working class. Nearly all the economic problems which press themselves upon the attention of pokin'ians to-day centre in the great problem of how to secure a just distribution of .1 nation’s wealth or income. It is easy to raise nominal wages, but such increases have a way of increasing the cost of living and lessening the purchasing power of the wages, so that the real wages re main where they were before. Prohibition does not offer a final solution of thi' distressing problem, but »t will beyond all doubt redress somewhat the present inequality, and in crease the proportionate share of labour in tlit* National income. The proof is easy. The trade is a monopoly, and the uniform feature of all monopolies is that they draw out of the national income a share greater than their contribution to that income. They take out of the fund more than they give. This means that some producers must be working for the monopoly, and letting it consume what they have put in. That such is the c ase w ith the brewing trade is demonstrated in the follow ing way: — First, the brewing trade receives a higher percentage of profit on capital invested then any other business. The Hon. Mr Fisher, who has access to all the information upon which a re-

liable estimate can be based, computes the annual profits of the breweries at 50,000. The subscribed capital of all the breweries is put down at £477,000, thus the rate of profit on capital invested is over 50 per cent. The average rate of profit on industrial, and commercial undertakings in New Zealand is certainly not more than 10 per cent. This mean that for every .£IOO of capital supplied to assist production, £.lO worth of goods is taken out of the national income as remuneration for the service rendered. If capital takes more than 10 per cent, out of the income, it is 'certainly taking more than it has put in. Assuming the brewers by their capital of .£477,000 increase the national fund by ,£47,000 being 10 per cent, of their capital, then they draw out of the national fund goods to the value of ,£203,000 in excess of their contribution. This means that the other classes of the community have ,£200,000 of commodity less to consume, because the brewers took that amount more than their share. If the brewing industry was not a monopoly there would be over .£200,000 to distribute amongst the labourers and employers of the Dominion more than there is at present. “The chief sufferer from the undue share of the national wealth obtained by the trade is the labouring man. This appears clearly from the fact that the brewing industry pays a less proportion of its takings in wages than any other business. On a turnover of ,£793,000, the wages paid per yvar are £109,000, being 13.8 per cent, of the turnover. In the woollen industry 36.3 per cent, of the turnover is paid in wages, the clothing industry 33 5 per cent., the furniture industry 35.7 per cent. This means that if the trade were abolished and the money spent upon it diverted to the purchase of other goods, nearly three times as much of the money expended would go in wages. The brewing trade employs 741 persons. The abolition of the trade will mean the employment of nearly three times this number at the existing rate of wages, or a general- increase of wages throughout. Insistence should be put on the great truth that the motorcars, splendid houses and furnishings enjoyed by the brewers, represept the consumption of wealth which under a just system of distribution would be consumed by the working man. It is literally true that the rich carpet

on the door of the brewer’s house belongs, not to him. but to the working man. The brewer has it only because he is enabled by hU monopoly to take out of the national fund a value in excess of what he has contributed to it, and consequently the working man takes out of the fund a value less than that which he has contributed to it.” The afternoon session that closed the Congress was marked by an enthusiastic re-election of the 'President in a way that must have touched him deeply. Three times did he decline the honour, on the ground that he had already held it longer than he should have done, and that .he could work ju>t as faithfully and effectively for the cause outside the President’s chair; three times did he nominate other members, but the Congress was determined, and as the gift of the Congress, and at its urgent request, he finally accepted the Presidency amid great and continual acclamation. One word in closing as to the Mass Meeting in the Town I fall. It was a great success. Several h indreds sat down to the substantial lea provided by the churches and temperance organisations of the City; and at the Public Meeting afterwards the large hall was practically filled. The speeches were of a high order, and the proceedings throughout were marked by great enthusiasm. Veteran workers in the Temperance Cause could not but feel grateful as this convincing proof of the great advance made since the early days of the movement ; and all felt that it augered well for the further progress that it is hoped will make this year memorable in the annals of our Dominion.