LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 70, 17 December 1918, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Hi O'CLOCK CLOSING

Sir,—A great deal of nonsense is being talked and written about an alleged breach of faith on the port of those members who voted in both Houses of Parliament on the clause moved by me, providing for the early closing of hotel bars as a part of the permanent law of the land. Firstly let me say that, so far as members of Parliament are concerned, no pact, agreement, ur arrangement of any kind relating to the sale of liquor lias ' mado at any period since the i:oi. -.cement of the war, so consequently lucre can tavo been no breach of fftitii, as suggested. It is admitted thai, in 1916 ail attempt was made bv the conflicting elements in the llouso to come to an agreement regarding tho hours for the sale of liquor. Many meetings vera held, and those mqmbers who were trying to rcduce the hours in accordance with the recommendation of a Parliamentary Committee, were preparing to make what they deemed reasonable concessions to the Trade, and offered to settie the argument en the basis of 8 ociock until 8 o'clock for the war, and six months thereafte - . The tutinost efforts were made to iuduce those supports ing Trade interests to accept this reason- ■ able compromise, but tho efforts uiado were futile, and failure resulted. By the abpve your readers will 6ee' tbnt what has been so freely stated about : a breach faith, has no foundation in fact. On die contrary, as goon as negotiations failed, the commenced in the House, and each side endeavoured.to' elrect its purpose. The 8 o'clock vote was defeated by 13 votes, <1 o'clock was tjicd and failed by one vote, which wna lost owing to one member being absent owint; to non-delivery of a telegram. AH this, of course, confirms the statement that there was no agreement. In 1917 ihere was a clamour for G o'clock closing, and another fight took place, resulting in a land slide in favour of 6 o[cloek, the majority being substantial. On this occasion 1 moved tlmt the hours of closing be fixed until altered by a poll. I did not, however,' divide the House on this occasion. This year, the proposals brought down were on entirely now lines, viz., Prohibition with compensation, and the bare majority principle " scame law for the first. time. This, 1 claim, shows that as far as Parliament is concerned, no compact in regard to the duration of B o'clock closing was ever, entered into. Further, regarding the proposals brought down this session, neither I, nor as far as I know, any uf those who supported me, was aware of the proposals, till they were introduced into the House; not only were we not a party to the proposals, but we were not aware of.their nature.

Every step taken since the commencement of the war was accompanied by a keen fight, which, of course, could not have been possible had there been any shadow of ail agreement. This now brings me to the. point that there might have been an arrangement between those who represented the Trade on the ona hand, and Prohibitionists on the other, and that the 6 o'clock amendment carried by both Houses of Parliament constituted a breach of that undertaking. If any such.agreement was come to, it was entirely outside the knowledge of members of 'Parliament, who were instrumental in pushing the motion for early closing to a successful conclusion. Presuming some such agreement existed' outside the knowledge of members of Parliament, it might be a fit and proper suggestion that this kind of thing sometimes ends in disaster. Parliament as I understand it, cannot undertake to ratify agreement* entered into between outside parties without its knowledge. In conclusion I firmly believe that the great bulk of the people of the Dominion believe that the early closirfc of hotels and clubs has come to' stay, and that it is a beneficial and helpful measure.—l am, etc., V ' ■ C. A. WILKINSON. December 12.