THE LIQUOR QUESTION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 31, 31 October 1918, Page 6

THE LIQUOR QUESTION

. DEPUTATION FROM THE TRADE REPLY OF GOVERNMENT LEADERS [Extended Report, Published by Arrangement.] A deputation representing the National Council of the licensed liquor trade interests of the Dominion waited upon the Prime Minister (lit. Hon. W. P. Massey) and the Minister of Finance (Sir Josoph Ward) yesterday, to present a petition containing iiOo'.i&G signatures, praying that three issues be placed on the ballotpaper:—National Continuance, • National Prohibition, and National Ownership. Mr. K. Bollard, M.P., introduced the deputation. Mr. A- J3. Kernot. .president of tho National Council, eaid the petition was the largest and most numerously-signed petition which it had ever been the lot of any New Zealand Parliament to receive. "You will remember, sirs," continued Mr, Kernot, "that at the close of tho session of Parliament in 1917 you made a statement to the effect that a definite solution of the liquor question in this Djjiinipn should be found. We contemplated' that suggestion, and wo have found what we consider to be a definite and n true solution of the auestion." The petition did not ask for the dividing of the people while the war was on. That would be unpatriotic- They did not seek to create sectional strife and political bitterness at this time; but the petition requested that an alteration of the voting-paper on the liquor question should be made for (lie next general election. Their proposal, supported by the petition, was that there should be three issues on the ballot-paper, namely ;—National Conliriuance, National Prohibition, National ■ Ownership. The submission of these issues to tho people would allow of all having an opportunity of expressing their views on the whole question. The petition contained no fewer than 306,826 signatures, which represented an absolute majority of tho electors of the Dominion, thus giving added emphasis to the election returns of December, 1914, when 257,000 elector voted for National Continuance. ■ Asp;rsions lind already been cast by their opponents upon the genuineness or tlie signatories. This may have been done in ignorance. Although they knew it was the custom of a defeated party to abuso their opponents, that being the position their opponents had found tttemselves in in regard to the lost election and their petition/the interests represented by the deputation challenged and demanded a scrutiny of both petitions, for no matter what their opponents petition might be like, they were satisfied as to the wmUnentrt of their own. Occasion had been taken by their opponents to malign the people of the Dominion and to libel soldiers on the score of efficiency. The soldiers had been spoken of as being over-indulgent, and tho neople' of the country as being inefficient through their consumption of alcoholic liquors, although there were no more sober and temperate people among civilised nations. It was with gratification that they noted how the Governor-General e speech at tuo opening of the present Parliament lnferentially repudiated ihe assertions of the Prohibitionists, that Prohibition was necessary to improve the efficiency of the soldiers. They were proud of New Zealand's soldiers, and were satisfied that the men who had fought for liberty and civilisation abroad ought not themselves to be deprived of their own liberty and their privileges as fre* citizens in their absence. As to tlie efficiency of tue people, it wos only necessary to point out '■that (luring four years of war, nnd notwithstanding the withdrawal of over one hundred thousand men from their ordinary avocations, the people had loaned to the Government thirty-five millions sterling; had exported one hundred millions sterling in produce; increased their bank deposits by thirty-eight millions sterling, and had voluntarily contributed upwards of two millions sterling to patriotic purposes.' Mr. Jlassey: That two millions should be five millions. ■ , Mr. Kernot: We always keep well within figures. That is why I purposely understated, instead of overstated them. Mr. Massey: That speaks well for tlie Government's administration, doesn't it?

Mr. Kernot: It speaks well for the temperate nature of our statement. And yet the Prohibitionists and their associates constantly reiterate the assertion that our soldiers and our people are lacking in efficiency and sobriety. Surely such statements in the face of New Zealand records inuet be condemned. There is, therefore, in our. judgment «and in the opinion of the hundreds of thousands of people who have eigned this petition, absolutely no necessity for the dividing of the people on the liquor question ai this time, and our petition requests that the National Government shall only prepare for a true and definite solution in terms of the.petition at the next general election.

The Brewers' Point of View. Mr. C. Speight, representing tho brewing section of the licensed trade, stated that the brewers of New Zealand manufactured aoi article which had been in domand of tho people from time immemorial, and the commodity manufactured was regarded by the consumers as essential to their health, comfort, and well-being. He repelled with indignation the sneering remarks which had been made by the promoters of the Prohibition petition with regard to the honesty and straightforwardness of the petition he supported. This demand for an alteration on the ballot paper at the next general election was asked for by htiildr&ds and thousands of men and women of this country, who were as loyal and patriotic as any other minor section of the New Zealand public. But then, such allegations were simply on all fours with the wild and ill-con-sidered statements of Prohibitionists. Tho brewers did not own the whole of the businesses connected with the licensed trade, and did not take the whole of the revenue derived from that trade. It was a popular conception that the brewers owned all t'he hotels and uccommodation houses in New Zealand. This popular conception had beeii erroneously created by the ignorance of their oppouents. Over 80 per cent, of the licensed hotel property in this Dominion was owned by private individuals, who were not connected with the trade, ns a trade, ill any connection whatever, savo as tho freeholders, , or what they called the private owners of hotel properties. Tho majority pf tho s -brewing companies in New Zealand were not individual institutions; many were limited liability companies with hundreds of shareholders, whoso living w;as to some extent—if not altogether—derived from the dividends they received, just ns other shareholders of otlier,ipubHc companies derived their livelihood from similar dividends.- He hoped that the petition would receive thn sympathetic consideration which its moro than three hundred thousand signatories had a right to expect.

Ready for State Ownership. Mr. 11. Dwyer, speaking on behalf of tho Licensed Victuallers' Association, said (hey were engaged in a perfectly legitimate business, and were carrying it on in a perfectly legitimate way. They would, or course, desire to bo allowed to cpuduct their businesses under the law and in keeping with the law always, ami not bo subjected to continuous irritation by public agitators, who had been using tho war to : advance their own political ends. They were at one Vith tho Primo Minister in his desire for a full and definite eolution of this question. Notwithstanding their desire to carry on their own businesses in their own way under tho law, they were ready to accept State ownership, because tuch an institution would still preserve the rights and liberties of the. 306,836 petitioners in regard to their use of alcolohic liquors. The Prohibitionists had not respected the will of the majority, and it'was therefore desirable in tho interests of all classes that a fair, an adequate, a just, and a reasonable solution of the question should bo made. He would Hko to observe that the national debt wns approximating two hundred millions sterling, and ho believed the Finance Minister would hesitate to sacrifice a million and a half Vf voluntary taxation which accrued to him through tho businesses they represented, and impose that taxation upon tho necessaries of life, which would still further increase the burdens of the people, and

render more grievous the ever-growing cost of living.

Mr. Massey in Reply. Mr. Alasscy: 1 have not noticed in the speeches any suggestion with regard to tne majority wmoli jou propose should decide ill* issues referred to in the petition. Have you made up your minds on that point i , Js it to be a tare majority, or wnat do you propose? jir. Kernot: A bare majority on our petition. ilr. Massey: I want that point to bo qujie climi , . 1 bit- Joseph Ward: Are you asking for preieienciut voting-! , ■ Jit. .Im-iiot: Au, we are not. "Air. Uwyer: We say that there are two pi-nippies involvtu. 'x'ne principles are uuuoi , or no liquor. State ivuersiiip means Me. continuance oi tne «ile of iiquor, and tnere aro therefore only two principles involved, although there aro inrte issues. Therefore we say that on aoaoiute bare nmjoi-ity should decide.

Air. JiassL-y: lou require a bare majority on any one ot tneso questions i" Air. Jjwyer.: A bare majority must carry any one issue. Air. iiiujsey: a.bare majority of those voting ? in , . Dwyer: Yes. bir Jostpn \vard: Does National Prohibition uicau with c-oflinensatiuii or without?

A delegate: It .'means fom , and a half years' notice, as tue present law stands. Air. Massey: i do uot know that i can say liilicli to you in α-eply, except just Lo explain the position iroin the borers.* ineut's point of view. Tliis' is not tlio first deputation wo liavo had- on this question, even during the prusent session, aithougn tlie session is oniy a lew days old. i deputation waited upon us troin cue business men, then another enuiu along from the Proiumtiouists, and we have ii tiurd deputation uere to-day lrom ihu Trade, ily .secretary lutorined me this morning tuat applications have come in from other sections asking to be heard in the same way. J. do not Know if they intend to approach the Mouse or the Gov- ( eriiment by petition,'or if tuey intend Jo come along and express their opinions on the proposals now prominently before the country. You will understand, therefore, that the. proper position foe the Government to take up is simply this: that until we get the wliolo of the petitions s or opinions from these eections of the community which intend to express them lo the Government, it would not be the right thing to define or outline the attitude of the Government on the question. That would be judging the proposals before they are before us. Aβ soon as we get all the views before us we will deal with the Question. Lot, me say, 'by the way, that any further representations must coma within a very few ! days. If there are any further petitions or deputations they must come along certainly i.ot later than next week, because the matter will then be refcured to Cabinet., \V'e have already acquired a lot of information on what is admittedly a very difficult question. I think we have nil had a jjood deal of experience in thinking upon the very difficult problems invoked in , this question. I would just like to say, aud I' am glad to notice that the speakers agreed with me, that I hope very sincerely that whatever happens lo be done— and something must be done, some action certainly will be taken—will be final and satisfactory. (Applause; Something was said about the soldiers. , It is just as well to be perfectly clear that whether tho question is submitted to the electors at the time of a general election, of by way of a referendum or plebiscite, the vote of the soldiers will ho taken. The Government have quito made up their -minds on that point. On the other points they have not made up ■ their minds, aud it will be impossible for me to give you a definite opinion today as to what the Government proposals will be. When the whole of the proposals liavo been submitted to us, thm at the earliest possible "moment you will be informed, and the public will be informed, of the legislation, or the nature of the legislation, that the Government intends to introduce. (Applause.)

Compensation Clause Important. Sir Joseph Ward, in reply, eaid: "I have listened to (lie three petitions or, rather, seelione petitioning, with' a- good deal ot' interest. 1 want to say, as the Prime ilinister has said, that I think this matter has to come up for settlement with a view to letting the people of this country finally say whether they are goinif to have tliu qunstion ot Prohibition, Continuance, or whatever it may be, everlastingly dragged across the trout of what Trnay call the public questions of the day. This country has got some mighty difficult problems to settle within the next few years, and will probably have to make a start within i the'next year. These questions are vital to every 'interest in the country, and m my opinion every section of the community has got to recognise it. On this all important question tho introduction of the compensation clause, from mj point of view as a public man, :s important. I understand that it has teen generally assented to by different sections of the community who have iieen opposed of it before. It is one of the important elements that are K oing to come into this matter, and in tahnpith the representations you have made, 1 tor one am going to keep that issue in connection with this important matter clearly before me. (Applause.). And v lien we have gone into the in Cabinet, after tlrf two pet itions, are received that I understand are to .une, the whole matter will receive that condition which the Prime Mm.ser has referred to, and you, gentlemen, will have an opportunity of seeing what the proposals of tho Government are as snon as decided on them The nation is a very important and difficult die, at.d Luires-the fullest consideration as far Parliament, and fte itfoplo of the country are concert. (Applause.) ' .