LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1956, 13 January 1914, Page 9

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

THE PROHIBITION MOVEMENT. A REPLY TO MR. WM. RICHARD- \ SON. Sir, —This Prohibition gentleman 1 camo from Auckland to disturb the ' calm of our New Year over the interminable drink question. His deliver- j anco would not bo worth noticing but for the fallacious and erroneous doctrines and views ho propounded and ad- ' vanced. For instance, Mr. Richardson blamed the politicians for imposing a threefifths majority and asserted that politicians favoured tho Trade. But pollticians say: Why should wo sacrifice ■ £900,000 a year of voluntary revenue at the whim or fancy of the Prolnbitionists who do not contributo ono penny of this vast revenue derived from tho Trade? Tho Prohibitionists have not proposed, that they themselves should mako good tho loss thoy would . cause, the country, but as they gonerally have little or nothing to tax, thoy know- thoy shall escape any linancial j embarrassment they may bring upon Now Zealand. . Again, Mr.' Richardson conjured up ( some mock sympathy for tho Prohibi- . tionists .of Finland against whom tho Tsar interposed his veto. Tho Prolnbi- ■ tionists wanted to abolish tho manufacture and sale of alcoholic drinks, but • tho Tsar said, in effect: "The lnanufacturo and sale of alcoholic driiiks is my business. I have taken over this \ business in the interests of my peoplo j who am their father, and 1 will not ( allow you Prohibitionists, with your dc- , structive coercivo policy to conio be- | tween me and my people, between my ' ( business and-the Stato monopoly." Ono j of tho bulwarks of Russian finance is tho spirit monopoly, and tho elimina- | tion of private profit lias been the best j temperance reform tho world has ever . This Auckland evangel described the j "three-fifths majority" as ft noxious ( weed. It is far from that. It is the ( only remaining flower of liberty that ( preserves the rights of half a million - ■ men and women in thia coun'rv- from , .the domination of bigotry, ill-will, and j fanaticism. W\hy should half the popn- j latiort be .compelled to do without that - which they havo a tasto for hccause ] the other half has no tasto for it. Yet j that by a bare majority is what Jlr. , Richardson and other Prohibitionists ] aim at. The rule of tho Tsar of Rus- j sia is preferable to what Prolnbitionists would impose upon this Dominion. ( Mr. 'Richardson 'Cviewed tho Scot- , tish Temperance Act. It gives, he said, | the Trade eight years' notice of tho people's intention to institute a local , option poll. That is fair. 1-aircr-than the New Zealand Act which gives six ( months for local, and four years .for , National Prohibition;' And the fore- ( most judicial body in tho ivorld, the IJr;- -j tish House of Commons, has la'd "• , down by this Act that until 63 i-llths j of tho people affirm Prohibition in any ( community the Prohibitionists sliall_not ( imposo their veto upon tho Trade. - lhis is a larger margin than at present , rules iii New Zealand. Wo have ( allowed - the Prohibitionists too ; much. They have become a menace to f the public well-being, and threaten the | curtailment of personal rights;' Wo . cannot havo parsons and other non- , taxable persons in the community.- at- , tacking individual liberty and'assailing . the country's financial stability any , iL foremost, most civilised, most • truly religious nations on tho.earth today are tho largost consumers of alcoholic liquors, and tho _ most backward, least virile, 1 Wt!/. 3 O' n* 0 ; irrcligious and- hcatUfnish iirattharPiOT; hibition peoples of' tho. world. ■ True, all wise men. preach and practice tern- , pirance, but temperance i.v not total abstinence,. neither is moderation arid ■ the correct use of alcoholic beverages nrohibition. • Mr. Richardson, like all Prohibitionists, displays an ignoranqo of English language when: he attempts to mako these terms interchangeable. . Yet Mr. Richardson predicted "all era of unexampled prosperity" for Now Zealand under National Prohibition, but he did not: point ■ to any single country that had prospered or been raised in morality -bv tho adoption of Prohibition as a public policy_ or as A religious doctrine. Mr. Richardson did not propound any schemo of fresli taxation to make good the loss of £900,000 annually if Prohibition is carried. Ho said, however, that "partiar prohibition had made For prosperity" ; but every town that has adopted Prohibition in Now Zealand has not increascd_ in population—tho truo tost of I prosperity—so largely as the towns that enjoy the licensing system. Prohibition promotes, sly-grogging, and slygrogging. promotes crime,' and decent people keep away from the temptations to sinning, law-breaking, and vice that Prohibition creates. Even Mr. Richardson admitted that- temporary' Prohibition during strike times in Auckland "would havo been improved on had there been no sly-grog-selling." The ReV. Mr. Rogers, speaking at Hinds, Ashburton County, in a farewell sermon, warned all his -hearers against' drunkenness, "which lie believed was greater.in a-district where there were no licensed houses." • Yet what Prohibitionists advocate'to save from drunkenness in' actual operation and in the experience of those corripctent to determine' only increases the' temptations to this vice. I fail to see, Sir, how Prohibition is preferable to the present licensing system, which Was originally established for the purpose of promoting tempcr.ance.--I am. etc., '■' TEMPERANCE. Wellington, January 8. , BANK BATE OF iNTEREST. Sir,—Your correspondcnt "A Farmer" i 3 qui to right. Thero is no excuse for tho present- exorbitant bank charges, which is evidenced by the' one fact thattlio Bank-of Now Zealand mado over £850,000 in profit last year. But tho ■ other banks are just as bad, if not : worsc—piling up profits for their shareholders, who havo for twenty years paet' never, run short of good interest on thoir money. 'Bank managers appear to bo tho veriest Shylocks wo have | among us. Thoy havo' fio conscience tiow at. all. New Zealand is a better and safer country for investment than Australia, .yet tlio bank- charges hero aro nearly 50 per cent, higher. Can any cxcuso be offered for this disgraceful state of things? If so, I should like to know it. I admit thero is some excuse for the Bank of Now Zealand making a huge annual profit, but none for tho other banks, who have always done well out of us. It is the action of these other banks that I complain of. Wo nro paying far too much for hank accommodation, and the sooner wo start a State Bank now the better for Now Zealand. Even should we make a loss by a State bank, as wo may do, yet to oheck bank rapacity wo had bettor do 60. —I am, etc., TRADER. i Wellington, January 10, 1914.