THE MAJORITY QUESTION.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1966, 24 January 1914, Page 10

THE MAJORITY QUESTION.

■■ Sir,—lt "Moderate' 1 admits tint "One Vote One Vahie" 'steoms tii be right 'in Ims interpretation of' the ,Scottish Temperance Act concerning the. basis of vot'"K.,. 'jurglis, it ;|pcs not foiiuiv that i ruiiihitiou or No-License could prevail were "One Vote One Value's" majority, presuming that his interpretation-is correct, obtained in any registered area. If 1 interpret Clause'3'pi''the Act correctly, it appears Hint although the requisite'majority is obtained, the Licoris.ing Court may still grant certificates,' that is, licenses, lor thit sale, of alcoholic '[.'overages under' certain, conditions, to' inns, hotels, and even restaurants, nt its 'discretion.

in order that, there may lie tion as to the Ssbttish Temperance Act not heing a I'robibitioii measure entirely —not' even a No-License A6t<—let mo quote the part of Section 3 tin ivhich I. reply: "For the period during which NoLicense remains in force in, any area,' no certificate shall bo granted therein, exrapt that the Licensing, Court may, on being satisfied , that , under the special circumstances of the-.'ease, any Certificate is reasonably required; notwithstanding the fact that a No-License resolution is iivforco in the area, grant one or-more certificates for an inn and' hotel, or for premises structurally adapted for use, and bona fide'used, or to .be used. as. a restaurant." .' Thus, even although Np- . License is eafried by. the majority.' as interpreted by "One. Vote Olio Value," the Licensing Court ,may grant, as many licenses as it, iii its discretion may determine to be necessAi'v in-tlie registered area, "notwithstanding the fact, that a No-License resolution' is in force in flic area."

"Moderate's".chief contention as expressed and' quoted, .by "Ono Vote One Valuo" that Prohibition could not bo as ii:i) .tspim «i jioywjja '.{jised Scottish. Temperance Act as Prohibition could bo under Mr., Massey's proposal is, irrespective of the questions about majorities, maintained; and tho point that Mr. Massey's proposal will cut down the majority required to enrrv a proposal by one-half is borne out by The Dominion's summary of the Prime Minister's Licensing Act Amendment Bill. If the' Prime Minister's Bill would make provision for catering for the tastes and requirements of half tlie people in tho community by leaving: it lo the discretion of the Licensing Bench, and that. Bench not to be elccted by popular vote, but appointed by i,he Government, as I understand the caso to be in Scotland, then No-License or Prohibition would not be the dog-in-the-manger policy and tyrannous proposal it now is.

What Prohibitionists aim at is the enforcement, of their nostrum or pinchbeck reform upon the country by n bare majority, and "One Vote One. Value" points to the "salrmlid majority" of o-f,OOO of those who troubled lo vote being in favour of Prohibition. But by what authority other than Torco of numbers has any majority the right to decide what anv individual shall eat, or drink, or take, away from him or her the privilege and opportunity of determining the matter for himself or herself?

Besides "Moderate" wants to point out that notwithstanding this "jpl»n* did majoriti" tie opinion of No-Licanjo

areas m .New Zealand is not'so.'Voniici. on the Prohibition 'goose.as it was. And, if it ran Ijo shown that' No-Liceiise'. is\ a retrograde movement in those*' s that have adopled it iir.'Ncvv.-, Zealand ' then there is reason lor the opinion' that No-License and Prohibition -.-.haviv not proved acceptable to ihos«- v wli# ; ; have 'given them a fair trial.'-'"Moderns ate" takes the. last election returns and'' lie finds, that in ten out .of twelve''Nik License areas No-License could noV'han/ been carried had tho. vote been an originnl ono counting the votes for ' lion-' restoration as representing the Prohibition. vote, and. three of the 12' would* have roturned to tho liccnsing-,svstem : ' 011 a "bare majority.". > ■-.-.: &""&<''&■ The inequality and injustice' of' Xo-. License appears in this: A No-Licenao area may bc.inoro favourable to licensing than a licensed area, vet the tyrannyof Prohibition, with its sIV-groggeries*.. perjuries, and deciet, is still continued in the No-License, area. Here is. a concreto case : Port Chalmers has'a majority lor No-License in 1911 of 714 votes; Invercargill" a majority for'No-. License of only 544. liivercargill--'-" forced to endure all tho iniquities' and abominations of Prohibition, while -Port' Chalmers enjoys the licensing system and a method of respectable consumption. , . , If I had anything to do with moulding: the policy of the Liquor Party I would certainly move heaven and earth to got the law_ altered so that the tyranny of Prohibition could not he enforced if its voting strength foil below a'three-fifths majority," and that where it did seveuty-rivc per cent of the.former licenses should bo restored, which would be equal to tho former reduction vote. ■ Besides from a temperance reform viewpoint tho restoration of licenses is desirable. Tho Rev. Mr- Rogers, speaking at Hinds, Ashhurton, Eaid'- "Tho temptations to drunkenness aro greater where there are no licensed house" I am, etc., ' MODERA'IT