SIR. ROBERT STOUT'S VIEWS

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 166, 8 April 1919, Page 8

SIR. ROBERT STOUT'S VIEWS

ABOLITION OF LIQUOR FA VOUKED,

OVFK TIITKD OF CHIMB DIRECTLY DUE TO LIQUOK.

(Published by Arrangement.) The secretary of the New Zealand Alliance called on Kir Robert btout to a>k ii ue -would make any pronouncement on the use made by the "Moderates cl sonio past speeches of his. . Sir Robert said: "I have hitherto thought it better not to even have iny name on any electoral roll, though. J. understand the judges in the Home Country and America cast their votes at elections. 1 do not think however, that I should allow any political or other party to misrepresent my position ou what is a moral question. .L nave held for over 50 years the opinion that it is the right and duty of the people to control the sale of alcohol, and to prohibit the sale if -they so choose. As I -aid in 1876 in Parliament, so I reprat now, once you admit that the sale of' alcohol' must be licensed then you cannot stop at the power lining granted lo the people, to prevent all sale, -wy view and this can be seen in Nev Zealand Hansard, volume 20, pages 475 to 478, also volume ,80, pages 379-381. I also wrote an article vt the "New Zealand Magazine," pnblishod in 1877, entitle/ 'Intemperance and Licensing,' and 1 .said in that article, 'What then is lelt after dealing with objections to local ontion? Does not the question alter all come to this: Will the State interfere or will it behold thousands of its pnonlo being sacrificed last the liberty of the survivors is interfered with? This can be seen in my article, pages 70-83, in t.ie 'New Zea.land Magazine,' 1877. "This , question of license is a .moral cmestion, and'is'-not a political, party, or religious .question, and I Coulit if ever in New Zealand we have ken so stirred without regard to nationality, sectional politics, or creeds. "In my opinion, the quotation.that has been published from my article to the •Timaru Herald' ' (19U) might mislead npnple, as it i>s taken from it--' sttrini. I was not dealing with the right of tho State to maintain its existence, and to maintain the health of the people. 1 believe it is the duty of the State to . even insist on conscription if it is I'eccsBiiry for the defence of the nation, and I also believe that the State cannot allow poisons to be sold at the will of any person. It must secure the health of "the people, and this licensing question is a question of health and of morality, and if we find anything interfering with the health of tho people or with them, either physically or morally, it is the duty of the State' to interfere and to preserve the nation from'destruction. "Personal liberty must give way to the State.

"I understand it has been stated that T am opposed to compensation. I opposed the idea of compensation in speeches in Parliament from 187(i downwards, ami lmve always opposed it, because, in my opinion, the liquor people, the vendors of liquor, Jiave no right to compensation. That is for the l'eople to determine. Our Parliament, by its Licensing Act, 1910. save compensation, for if national prohibition were carried, licenses were to 'continue for four and u half years. That would mean a waste of perhaps eighteen millions of money. The proposed compensation was put in to prevent the trade being ended suddenly, whereas the four and n half millions is proposed with" a view-to ending the trade immediately, and it is for the people to say whether they will and a half millions to end the sale immediately, or pay eighteen millions spread over four years, and that is the question people have to det?rmi»e. Jt is not for me to dictate to any electors.

Any man of ordinary, commonsense could only give one answer. If there were any chance of/Parliament doing away with compensation 1 think the people should insist on it, but that seems to be hopeless at, present, seeing that Parliament has passed in its Licensing Act (his right; to compensation. I think that was wrong, but that is the law. and we must obey thij law, and therefore Ijia miction was: 'Will you get rid ol the traffic by four and a half millions, or will you get rid of the traffic by giving four and a half years' license!' , and that was the only question which Parliament would consider. "The reason T have taken a keen interest in the liquor question has been what I have, seen in my stay in New Zealand—now over fifty-five years. T know what has happened to many of tho boys who were under me at school. I was a teacher in'the years 'Gl to,'fi7. Many of my brightest boys have fallen •in tho race of life through intoxicants. Manv men who would have been a glory to New Zealand have pawed away from the same cause. I know from my o.xnorience as a lawyer and a Judge tln't at least one-third of the. criminals clii n "tly, and many more indirectlv. found t'uemselves in gaols from indulgence in intoxicating Honor. I said furt'ier, in my article in 'Intemperance and License.' in 1577, what eminent doctors have r-iiit* in reference to the injury of alcohol to healthy people, and tho medical opinion in that resnect has greatly increased during the past forty-two yen s. 1 have always been a total abstainer, and have always pointed out to our people the injury that alcohol docs to our new nation."