GREAT PROHIBITION GATHERING.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1291, 21 November 1911, Page 6

GREAT PROHIBITION GATHERING.

PROHIBITION NON-EFFICIENT. REV. E. S. GRAY WELCOMED HOME. The Rev. R. S. Gray addressed a wollat(ended meeting at tho King's Theatre last evening on "Prohibition in America." The chair was occupied by the Rev. S. Henderson. The chairman said it was ono of the objects of the meeting (o extend n hearty welcome home to the Rev. 11. S. Gray. Ml'. Gray was a valued lender of tho Prohibition parly. He belonged to New Zealand as a whole. . . . He had visited America lo gain first-hand information on matters of great interest to New Zcalanders, and had gained experience which would bo of great value in the coming campaign. (Applause.) The Rev. Mr. Gray proceeded to deal with the fact that in America, although 40,000,000 people wero living under prohibitory law, tho liquor bill was still increasing. . . . There was no really efficient prohibition ill America. Maino and Kansas had constitutional prohibition, and other States had "State-wide" prohibition, but the inter-State Commerce l.aw prevented the prohibition of importations'of liquor into "dry" territory. Tho "sealed package" law, which protected all posted parcels in the same way as private letters were protcclcd in this country, ensured that there could bo no examination of any sealed parcel of liquor posted into a No-License area. Until the Inter-Stale Commerce Law was amended there could never be real prohibition in America. Even then, where ono Stato was "dry" and an adjoining one "wet," it was impossible to patrol the whole of the boundary line—a line which was often merely an imaginary line. . . . The Rev. Mr. Gray then proceeded to describesome shades of "prohibition" in American States. And coming to tho dispensary system. he said: The "disponrayr system" in America did not prevent sly grog-selling. Sly grog-selling was rampant in cities where the dispensary system was in vogue. The system led men to buy liquor in largo quantities, and (o get beastly drunk. M. Savnnnal, the Chief ef Police, found it impossible lo get convictions against .breakers of the prohibitory law,. because all the. recent people in the town had purchased exemption from jury service, and in a city of 7.5,000 or SO.OOO inhabitants only about 500 were liable lor service. This remainder in-

eluded all tho drunkards and sly g-'-og-sellers in tho community. ... In Tennessee, in a town of about 7009 inhabitants, all the saloons wero wido openi although Statc-wido prohibition was supposed to be in force. Convictions could not be obtained, as no jury would convict. In regard to Maine, Ihoro was not much now to be said on the subject. . . It was true that in Maine last year 657 Federal liquor* license taxes wero paid, hut 4f!f) licenses were held by drugeisls, who had lo pay n fee; 200 were held by persons who sold medicinal prepavatione containing alcohol, while seventeen were held by persons using alcohol for medicinal or mechanical purposes. A sly frroi;.seller took out a license, and was allowed to do so even in » "dry Stnfe," because he had no desire to fall f"iil ol the-Federal authorities.—Extracted from "Lyttelton Times", October 17, 1911. The Rev. Mr. Gray has, in (he foregoing extracts, stated exactly what (ho Anti-I'rohibition party in New Zealand has been saying in-the newspapers for some weeks'past, and licensed victuallers ought to bo thankful for tho Rev. Gray'a thorough exposure ol those miserable methods the prohibitionists of New Zealand would like to foist upon this country in the names of righteousness and religion! Nearly half the people in America Mr. Gray says are living under prohibition, and the drink bill is increasing, It has more than doubled. Then prohibition is a farce. The story about "scaled packages," and tho posting of liquor into prohibited areas, shows that tho better-class of people living in NoLicense States can get all they want of good liquor, whereas the working man in the No-License area must put up with any rubbish he can get on the spot. • Prohibition, Mr. Gray demonstrates, is "class" legislation. Wo like to hear Mr. Gray talk of tho line between "dry" and "wet" States, and the cost of patrolling that line to prevent smuggling. Will our readers try and imagine the cost of patrolling and policing tho coast and inaccessible back-block territory of 'his country if prohibition is adopted in New Zealand? Mr. Gray also dealt with various shades of prohibition, and he'found "sly grog-selling rampant ill cities where the dispensary system was in vogue," and imagin" the prohibitory law being held in such contempt that against the sly grog-sellers no conviction could be obtained, the reportable people contracting themselves cut of the jury service. Sly grog-sellers were tried by their "peers," and no such jury would convict. Mr. Gray had little to say about Maine, but what he did say showed that Maine had fully half as many Federal licenced grog-sellers—who were also the sly prrgselling gentry in Maine —as we have licensed victuallers in New Zealand, and they fought on the side of the prohibitionists for the retention of the prohibitory law. Mr. Gray is a valued leader of the Prohibition party in this country, and ho conies back to New Zealand to induce the people of this Dominion to accept prohibition, which he shows to le a failure in America. His own words are; "There is really no efficient prohibition in America." Nothing more need bo said; Mr. Gray has reached the limit.

Hom-cvi'V, in view of nil that llio Rev. Mi-. Gray lias said, moil orate men and women in this country, who are torn pernio in their use of alcoholic beverage*, will surely decide on election day to votn for the continuance of tho present system of licensing rather than vol" for a met W that has proved inefficient in America, and is accompanied by such a deplorable condition of local and Stale Government as to ljn a diwraco to civilised and respectable people*