NO-LICENCE DISTRICTS

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3182, 5 September 1917, Page 6

NO-LICENCE DISTRICTS

Sir,—The Rev. John Dawsoh> notwithstanding his mis-statements as to tho state of No-Licence districts, lias proved my case. My charge is that drunkenness lias increased in No-Licenco districts since No-Licence was established; that the quantity of liquor legitimately going into No-Licence districts is not the quantity of liquor that, actually goes into these districts; and that tho conviction of the electors in these No-Licenco districts is that the promises of Prohibitionists -with regard to the benefits of No-Licence have not been fulfilled. My first charge, that drunkenness has increased in No-Licence districts since No-Licenco was established, is demonstrated by tho following table :— Convictions for Drunkenness in NoLicence Districts. © '••■3 iS §£ 'fc g-a !&« .2-3 "V o 8 • scr vJ£ ■ Jj .5 p«£ Invercargill.. 1 32 , 1120 Matauxa ; i 26 050 Clutha G • 15 250 Bruce 2 17 ' SSO i Oamaru 23 34 148 Ashburton ... 18 57, 316 Masterton ... 39 75 '102 OMnemuri ... 12 < 32 266 The Kev. John Dawson will not dispute this statement concerning Invercargill: "In the first'year of No-Licence only one drunk had procured liquor in Invercar..gill, and that at a wedding!" (p. 35 No- ■ Licence Tear-Book, published by the authority of tho N.Z. Alliance, of which the Rev. John. Dawson is official'and organising secretary). -. , I would point out that I have taken Mr. Dawson's' figures (because these he will not dispute, and tho Official YearBook of the alliance is my authority in most oases for the effect of No-Licence m the first year in the electorates named. According to tho latest return, however, published by yourself as being a copy of that which was laid before the House of Representatives the other day, the convictions for drunkenness in No-Licence ureas were as follow;— Invercargill, 154; Mataura, 23; Clutha, 16; Bruce, 13; Oamaru, 56; Ashburton, 119; Masterton, 68; Ohinemuri, 40. Mr Dawson gives..no authority for the figures of the convictions of drunkenness 'he has published. ■ I will not pursue the Kev. John Daweon in the exposure of his mis-statements further. There is ono question which, however, he asks' mo, which, tang a challenge, I will answer in order to show what I have stated with regard to the reverend gentleman to be absolutely correct. Hero it is: 'TVilli .«• Kennedy name one single year m which there has been a decrease in convictions for drunkenness in licenced districts since 1892, let alone a general /decrease, until last vear?" There are two questions involved here; but they aro answered' in one, for if there is" a general decrease m drunkenness in all licensed electorates on tho principle that the greater includes the less, there must have been a decrease in individual electorates. In 1892, the yenr Mr. Dawson asks about,.there were 53G0 cases. In 1897 there were 5204 cases (vide Parliamentary Paper 816, p. 6). There was a general decrease as between 1915 and 1916 of 2135 cases; and last year, Mr. N Dawson says, there was a decrease of, 2209 cases. My figures are taken from the same 'Parliamentary return. I wonder where Mr. Dawson gets his figures from. And he himself proves that there was a greater reduction of cases o" intoxication in licensed districts than in No-Licence .districts, by as much as three to one. This further proves my contention; that drunkenness has increased in No-Licence-.districts since No-Licenso was, estabh6ned. Only two points remain. Mr. Dawson says: "Roughly, there is only ontHsixtn of the liquor goea"'into the No-Licence districts' that is consumed in the licensed areas." The rev. gentleman's grammar is groggy, and his meaning obsoure. If the rev! gentleman means (or believes) that the quantity of liquor legitimately going into No-Licence districts -is all that goes into these districts, and that no liquoris going'in illegally, surreptitiously, and then the Bev.John Dawson is believing what no other sensible man or woman living in No-Licence districts does believe; and such belief as his is not known throughout licensed disis this: That No-Licence has proved itself utterly barren of results adequate to-the amount of money and time spent in its advocacy. At tho £2* meeting of the New it m determined ft raise \° f £ for this barren principle. « 'wouM be a good thing if tho New at its next meeting determined to put this lane sum of money into the War Loan. That the No-Licence and Prohibition agitation has been a wanton waste of energy, time, and money as far as temperance is concerned, and its practice l,v the people of this .Dominion, is shown liv the fact that there lias been nenrlv 150 per cent, increase in rases ot intoxication since the fin* district carried No-T,irence: and that for ten years before that period there had been a_decrense of nearlr 50 per cent The Prohibition and No-Licence agitation since 1891 has resulted, therefore, in no pod to the cause of temperance m this Jm--minion; and, further, tho people in NoLicence districts have shown bv tbeir votes at the last election that they considered No-T.icenco was unworthv of farther support. In Obinemiwi there was an actual maiority of over 200 in favour of restoration": inMasterton it was nearlr 700; in Ashburton over 900; and even Wellington South showed a majority in fnvmiT of restoration. As far as the Maeterton district is concerned, before No-L'cence we had 200 members on the licoks of our union, wheresis now wo have umder 70: that is wnit No-Licence lias done to us. I em satisfied in tov own mind that, if tho principle of State control were <riy>n n chance on th» votimr naper it would Wcarried bv a 75 per rent, mn'nrih- ; n thlfl Dominion. Prohibition and No-Licence iiave proved themselves barren of po« T insults from a temperance viewpoint, and the work of.the Control Board indent Tintnin has demonstrated tho benefit of State control, even : n a wintry wher» the consumption'of liivw "> far irreater tban it ; s in New Zealand'.—l am, etc., 11. KKNNEDY'.