LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 247, 12 July 1919, Page 8

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

THE LIQUOR POLL Sir,-I regret that absence from Weiiiigtxm has presided my replying sooner to Mr. D. 11. Ji-imllay's letter. I submit now the following considerations:—

1. It is an old and discredited dodge of the liquor trade and its champions to characterise any statement concerning their treat-inert of our fighting men as another sratuitous insult .hurled at the soldier. It is time such nonsense to abandoned.

asseil. that these men were so weakMilled as to be swayed by partisan propaganda? is a reflection upon his own or your readers' common sense. Does ho really expect them to believe that ho indulged in Ins own very peculiar propaganda simply as a pastime and with no thought whatever of influencing the soldiers vote? Upon that basis it is just; a trifle difficult to irdcrstand- tlm marked preference for misrepresentation. 3. The statement that "the gentlemen who composed tho Efficiency Board wero prohibitionists before (hoy were appointed lo the board" is not only a. clumsy subterfuge, hut a definite misstatement. Tho incf that none of the members were actively identified with tho Prohibition Party, and, as far as the leaders of tho party were concerned, the views of tho most of them on the -question of prohibition were mute unknown, is sufficient disproof of the grossly partisan suggestion that the hoard's recommendation was engineered by Iho prohibitionists. The simple fact is that these men were chosen by the Government as the most representative business inen of the Dominion, that they wero asked to report on the liquor quesiion, ur,d that, after taking evidence, they decided uianimousl.y that in the interests of the nation fie Jmiwr traffic should be abolished. In view of this Mr. Findlav'? simple and straightforward letter," which purported lo give the soldiers'an explanation of tho reasons for the poll, hue which omitted any reference lo the t.thcieucv Board, and placed the whole responsibility upon tho prohibitionlsts, is a really remarkable document. i. I did-not suggest that no charges nnd ever been made of excessive drinking upon the part of some of the soldier* Ihe facts are well known. The liquor trade s/rcatmont of some of our men who were not strong to withstand the special temptation, is too notorious to need further comment, but to suggest that tho j prohibitionists had besmirched the name I of our soldiers as drunkards from one end ol New Zealand to t'he other is an- | other flagrant illustration of Mr. Tindilays "simple and straightforward" sav- | ings.

5. Mr. Findlay discreetly ignores ray exposure of the Met that when he issued the further "single and straightforward" statement that the prohibitionists "had takeu no steps whatever" to secure, the soldiers the right to vote, it was public, knowledge that I had submitted this dpninnd to tlie Prime Minister and lie had replied that the provision would certainly be included in the Bill. The atfrnpt io make it appear that the provision that failure to vole on the part of someshould not invalidate-(he vote of tiio whole, was an attempt on the part of (ho prohibitionists 1o prevent iiho soldiers from voting, is just what might be expected, from such a "simple and straightforward" advocate. The clause was not suggested by (ho prohibitionists, but was accepted by them as it was by their opponents in. perfect good faith, and the result justified (.heir confidence. Tho suggestion tJjp.t the representations of the .Moderate League ensured a vole for (ho soldiers is directly contrary to fact. 0. I have never suggested that the Vyqhibition Party did not press for an inv mediate vote. The Efficiency Board recommended, this, and the ' Prohibition Party adopted it. They did so because, they believed that they would best conserve the interests of the whole nation by ridding it us speedily as possible of the enemy which Lloyd George declared to be worse tha.n (he Germans. To mutilate this into a statement that as soon as the soldiers' backs were turned tho prohibitionists determined (o get a catch vote, is such barefaced misrepresentation that even the: "simple and straightforward" Moderate League might have been expected (o boggle at it.—l am, etc., < It. P. GRAY, Dominion Organiser, Prohibition Campaign. Dunedin. Jiilv i, 1919.