PROHIBITIONIST.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18690, 13 May 1926, Page 11

PROHIBITIONIST.

TO THB BDIIOB 0* "iHK TPISS." i <' r __l h've no wish to enter on a Wr'oversy corning the ' '!dm your k-adcr. m todays ..Press'' in " hkh v 0" volltm ' c thc tpl n loi ; that Prohibitionists in what ■Jev aim at swi.d on no higher lou-l merit than tho makers and vendue indicating liquor. 'I bat is a ,tter that im.v well bo left to the i of' vour readers. When, i "that tlto Alliance - >Zh for thc preservation of the : *ffi« law in all its badness,. and favours only one important alteration, T must protest, against it as a scnous U inexcusable misrepresentation ft 'fret It is tnio that in my letter I reform! only to tho request made to •'"the Premier by the Alliance deputa- •: -lion last Friday for an alteration of the ;' vailot-paper. but your own report o: i ihat deputation to the Premier, pnblifhed in Saturday's issue, shows thot ,; jjjjt a s by no moans the only ro--1 ouest made'for improvement in extstinz conditions in connexion with the i ■ imior trade. Tho outstanding "bnd- '/• ness" of, "the existing law" is tho y rcandalous lack of enforcement, and ? > it is to this that the Alliance is fre- '■'■■ miently calling the attention of Gov- ' ernment. If the restrictive laws with \ T cgard to sales to minors, sales after £ lours, sales on Sundays, sales to inItoxicated persons were properly cnf forced, much of the existing evil ol the iljiquor trado wotild disappear. 'llio I'Alliance has very strong and sound on physical, economical, and f-humanitarian grounds for pursuing it 3 |; nnin objective, that of abolishing tho ] nliolly unnecessary and alwavs and ;>'iiieyitobly injurious trade in alcoholic ■.l'linuor'.for beverage purposes, but it ■-. ijJiw' never failed in the meantime to ppftss- for such modifications of tho jft'ejisting law as would lessen the griev- ■ ous harm it at present inflicts on tho '. "communitv.—Yours. <-tc., W. J. WILLIAMS. : _;. May 12th. 1926. ! |P [lt is difficult to believe, that our corh|".i respondent is not co«scio;usly un- :.'%; candid' in making his' charge of ;' » misrepresentation. We said (and we i ':']-■ chose our words with care), and we repeat,'because it is a fact,;that ; v " the Alliance stands for thc pre- ' serration of the existing law in all !■ its essential badness, and favours ;j. only one important alteration" — !/Mj,'': riamcJy, the two-issue ballot paper. '•jSPrr' Everyone knows, for we recorded, ' ';';;■ and used as the basis of thc sen'fencei quoted, trie fact that various .'••':■ '^sra'ajl 'amendments, some of- them and all of them of no ; essential importance and in no way ':'■■':'■ ■. -telated to-the principles of the ■:|--. asked for by thc Alii-' 'l f *ance'.- These amendments, needless to say, were proposed only because :f- feels that it must *'T'. 1 of*concern 7 for' ■ ; ' reform. The absurdity ' them shows how rusty th£j|ffiice ! s ideas concerning , tcmpe'ranceL and I '•■ liave ' . r coneen- '. .;},'',.trateffon^ prohibition.— Ed. The