PROHIBITION IN AMERICA

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 276, 18 August 1919, Page 3

PROHIBITION IN AMERICA

THE ATTITUDE OF LABOUR

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—l see, that the name of Mr. E. Kennedy, secretary of tho Hotel Workers' Union, is again to tho fore in bolstering up the liquor traffic, which has wrought w> much harm to the members of many unions throughout this land. He complains, first, that in the reported interview of my recent visit to America, 1 liavo only a one-sided view- of tho position there. Bid he expect that I could eay everything in such a brief talk as tho one I had with your reporter F I did not attend the Labour Conference at Atlantic City, nor did I see the complete report of that conference, and do not ■know whether or not tho resolution quoted by Mr. Kennedy was adopted. I did, however, seo that a liquor champion paper made a statement that prohibition was a menace. 1 wonder'if Mr. Kennedy got his inspiration from that source. As to tho apprehensions of Mr. Gosipers "regarding tho results unless light beer is allowed" I pay littlo hoed. Tho friends of liquor havo been trying .to frighten America for some time with thoir "apprehensions," but havo not succeeded in doing so. Their effort to create. a,_"No beer no work" combination has met with the miserable failure it de-Berve-a.

Tho New York "Tribune" of May 8 quotes Dr. George W. Kirchway,.director of the United States Employment Service, New York City,- as faying that his department is not alarmed over the labour situation arising from tho closing of the saloons on July 1. The association opposed to national prohibition ilaiuied. that 800,000 men would bo thrown cut of work. Dr. Kirchway said ho bVjieved there would be le<s unemploymE >t in July than at any time, because " tho rapid return of industry to a moro normal basis.

• John B. lonnon. for a lony time treaanrer »f the Labouv Ifedersition, urged the convention at Atlantic City to Keep its hands off the prohibition question. "This," he said, "is going to bo a dry country in spite of any action that may be taken here." It is to the credit of the representatives of tho blacksmiths, spiuners, sterc'ifypers, and teachers tliat they' Voted against the liquor proposal. It is also encouraging to' see tJwt alongside the representatives of dry Seattle, those of wet Chicago recorded their vote against "booze," and it must have been exceedingly disappointing to tho trade, who were said to be expecting practically a unanimous .vote of 2,000,000 labour union men, to find fewer than 27,000 votes. Complaint 2.—Mr. Kennedy says that I did not tell yon that President Wil60n, on his Tehirn to America, had advised Congress to exempt beer and wine from prohibition. "Now, the fact is that President Wilson did not return ■"to America until the early part of July, whoreas the message Mr. Kennedy has in mind was cabled from France in tho middle of May, and even Mr. Kennedy did not tell you that tho Senate (leolined to' accept the President's ad,vice by a vote 1 of 55 to 11. Complaint 3—That 1 did not tell you that the prohibitory law in Canada had instituted an extensive trade in wines tind other stimulants. Now what arethe facts? Eight out of tho nino provinces, namely, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba Ontario, New Brunswick Nova Scotia anH Newfoundland, have prohibition. fo, .beverage purposes. Eighty per C; it. of Quebec is dry by local op't : .r -nd by vote taken last yea'r_ the oilvv,- JO per cent, should havo been dry on May 1 this year, but some strange power reached Parliament beforo ■ this wane into force, and that body agreed to a referendum being taken as to whether beer and light wine should still l>e sold in the wot portions of tho Province of Quebec. Aβ I understand the war regulation, no one could purchase wine and. beer in tho other eight provinces for beverage purposes; as to whether Quebec secured from Sydney 500 to 1000 barrels I have no information, but Mr. Kennedy states that to bq a fact, and declares that tho wine had an alcoholic strength of from 33 to -12 .of pi-oof spirit. I will ask if Mr. Kennedy considers that light wino. If. so, what is the strength of strong wine?" I' may ; say frankly T r'-> r-.nt accent.his statement, and shall ■. fa--' ■.■-"-' evidence . than his stateMeni. ueforo-1 do so, and he may rest assured that the Customs Department of Quebec will look into that matter bofore it is allowed to land on Canadian soil. The position in Ontario is that when the Parliament of that province stopped tho sale of liquor during the war period it was on the distinct understanding that beforo licenses should bo renewed after the war a vote of the people 6hould be taken as to whether piohibition should continue or licenses be restored, so that the vote to be taken, possibly next month, is in accordance with that provision, and we shall se« before long what is the mind of the people oi that province in regard to permanent prohibition. Mr. Kennedy says that Labour and other decent people , are protesting; against prohibition in both the United States and Canada for the purpose of circumventing it. Surely Mr. Kennedy does not expect us to believe these statements. 'Will Mr. Kennedy tell us when federated labour has put itself on record against prohibition either in Canada or United States?

Tho Hon. John G. Cooper, member of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, and Congressman from. Youngstown, Ohio, addressing a largo meeting in Washington, D.C., in June last, and replying to Mr. Gompers, said:—"Let those who say the workers oppose prohibition remember that in such places as Youngstown there was a largo foreign vote, mostly wet, that not all, tlio businessmen and professional men .were dry, yet that community registered an overwhelming majority at the last election for prohibition, and it was the vote of the working men which brought this about."

It is true that certain. Labour organisations are opposed to prohibition, but these men represent various crafts that are engaged in tho manufacture, sale, nnd distribution of alcoholic liquors. I hold no brief against these men, and 1 assure you that I would do them a good turn if it lay in my power to do so; liut the fact Temains thnt they are engaged in tho manufacture and sale of that which is tho greatest enemy that the. working people have in this land-to-day. Therefore, ns one who has the welfare of the working people at heart, I feel it is my duty to oppose not those men personally but this institution which they are upholding. Tjieie ui-c many Labour organisations that do not oppose prohibition of the liquor traffic, and a. goodly number of them have gone on Tecord as being opposed to the saloon. I am glad that my name is recorded upon tho rolls of one of tho great organisations of workers which has gone on record in support of State and national prohibition. In 1015 the delegates to tho triennial convention of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, representing about 70,000 members, unanimously adopted a resolution pledging this organisation and its beet efforts in mipport of the abolition of the liquor business. Warren S. Stone, grand chief of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, has this to say concerning this question! "We fight the liquor evil as hnrfl; as any of the churches. Liquor has no placß in our modern railroading. I never expect to manage a railroad, bnt if I were to, a man could not work for me who took a drink of Uqnor oithor on or off duty. I would not make a difference between fh'e two, beoamso a man who will drink off duty, is not fit to go on duty when the time comee, I fall to understand why our men do not come out in tho open in certain localities and fight this enemy. It tends to destroy the homo life, to lower the tone , of the citizenship- of tho community, and th'e morals of the individual as well, to aay nothing, of his mental, and physical health. Now when Mr. Gompere ffaye that organised Labour is a pit against prohibition, I want to osk if he is epeaTung for tho great organisation of tho Brotherhood of Locomotive Enginoew." This is what tho Grand Chief-of the Brotherhood eaye:— "Some time ago I wrote lefctore to the following leaders of organised Labour in Denvor and the State of Colorado —W. C. Thornton, president of the Denver Trades and Labour Assembly; Chester J. Common, president of the Denver BmldW Tradefe Otmcil; Clint C. Houston, editor of the Denvor labour Bulletin,' which is tho offieift} organ for the nmion Jdbour orgnnisanbue of Colorado—md rwpiceted those moo to givo me In writing uifiAr opinions Qβ to tho effect of pToMmfciMi on the working

pooplo of Deivrer and Colorado. I reoeived ».u answer to my letters from all three of those Labour leader.?, and all of tiiem speak in glowing tonus of prohibition.

"Mr. Houston says: 'The prohibition law in nino months has worked a wonderful revolution for'tho good, and at least 75 per cent, of the union voters who wero against the amendment would support it now.' "Mr. Common said: 'After 12 months of trial I am absolutely of tho opinion that prohibition is the proper tilling, and has come'to stnv in Colorado.'

"Mr. Thornton said: 'In my humble opinien the workers of Denve-r and Colorado arc a lot better off mentally, moirJly, financially and physically than 'il'fj ".-ere when tho State was wet, and

;•";-.: •••■icrinot gather a, good-sized company whioK would proclaim openly for the return cf the Fiiloon.'""

.Contract these statements with tho words of Mr. Gouipers. Mr. Copper further said: In yesterday morning's

"WashingtonPost":'"T notice that we arn going to have a great wet protest hero on Fiasj Day, June U, and they expect to have fifty thousand union Labour men in line. I want to read just a line hero in respect to the -organisations in tho district of Columbia, which says: 'Pledges to participate in the mass protest have been received by -the control body from' nearly every labour union in the district. Some organisations have adopted resolutions imposing fines unon members who fail to take part.' What do you think of that friends? That, some of the labour organisations, according to that statement, are going to imposo a fine upon the labour men in this district who will not take part in this demonstration apainst prohibition on Fliur Pay, Juno U. I want to ask these men that are organising the demonstration if they aro foing to get any body .of working' men "from the State of Michigan? Ar? thsy poing to <ret any body of men from the State of 'Colorado? Are they »oing to bring thorn from Indiana and Kansas? Are they goiw» to bring them from Ohio? I will venture to eay that there will not float one donation from any of these dry States representing organised labour that will apnear here on Juno 14 in that parade." Lnbonr DeclaTes for Prohibition.—By a unanimous vote of 1.50 delegates, and without any onposHion, the Seattle Central Labour Council went on record i ll favour of nation-wide prohibition, and in'trucfed itn. Labour delegates to the national moving of thn American Federation of Labour to introduce- and work for the adoption of a resolution opposing the re'poal of the war-tin)* Trohibitii" Act and urging organised Labour in all its brarclms to demand and aid enforcement of that law.

This Central Council of the Labour Forties of the biggest city-on the Pacific ehast takes sharo issue with SamuelRompers, head of the American Federation, of labour; who reiei't'v dcclf'ed opnsition to prohibition resolution adonted by the Seattle workers declares thnt four years of experience has convinced ovirnniscd Lebour of Seattle and of the State- of Washington ti'sit nrohibition has raisod the p'n.ndnrd bf living, giving workers added fishti"c nowpr in th" «trns*'o with H;" employer for the full nreduet ot his toil flnd has clear"'! t'"> brnii of tb" worker to (rr,ii>ple with the problems that confronted him.

Crnnpl-Mnt'4.—Mr. KPTvnedy says that I did not Wl you that there was a movement on foot to set aside the prohibitory law, and he quotes the fact thnt. Renter's fttprtt sent, a ea'blfenim on M.-vy 24 to that effect. I was rot nv-are of that fact, but Mr. TCpune'ly ehnnW >now that long j-ince that date President Wilsm, on whe-ra the trade wivs depending, has had to make a public statement whidi wn« reeordotl in the N«v York "Times" of .Tune 29, 'thirty-six days Voter than !iUutcr,? messnge of Mny 24, . anil which second Reuters npnarently did not fend. Perb.i.ns they wore not asked to send ■ thro. It nnnMred in the New York "Times" as follows:—

"President sends n prohibition miissfipo: Says hn will act when d«inobili r .ition ends, —Washington, June 28.—The following meesnge from President Wilson stating his stand on Hie prohibition question was made public at tho Wlnit" House to-night bv SocretaiT Timmliy: T am convinced thnt the Attorney-Genera! , , is right in ad■visintr me that I hare nolnstal power at this time, in the matter of the ban on linuor. tinder the Act •of November, 1918, my power to take action is restricted. The Act provides thnt after Juno 80, 191!), 'until the fXHKMv'on of the Tiresent war and thereafter until the termination of demobilisation, the date of which eh»ll be determined and proclaimed by the President:, -'t sh.ill Iμ unlawful, and so on.' This law <io?s not specify thnt thft ban ehn.U be lifted with the Vignintc of Tjence. hut with the deterrainntion-if the <iemobi?ri.<Kition of tho troopra, and I cannot say that this has bp»n accomplished. My information from tlii War Department is that there a.re s»f-ill a million men in tho .Army under tho Cores. It i? clear, therefore, thnt the failure of Congress to act upon the sug/fesHon contained in my mewwe of May 20. 1919, asking for a repeal of the Act of November 21, 1918, so far as it applies to winre and beer, makps- it imnossiblo to net in thi*_ patter at' this time. When demobilisation is terminated, niv power to act without Congressional action will bo oxercised.—Woodiw Wilson."

Mi , . Kennedy tells i us that a correspondent of the Londou "Times," writing iroin Now York in February last, says: "Threats of strikes throughout the country if prohibition is drastically euforoed arc assuming an increasingly menacing character." As an evidence of this he tells us a general strike has been Tampant in Chicago, and there has been much loss of life ns "the result of the prohibition movemeut. How could thia possibly bo true in February, for, up to July 1, Chicago was ono ot the wettest cities in America.? As to Winnipeg, I was in that city in the midst of the strike, aud people of every class were .saying but for prohibition it would have been impossible to live in tlus city during the strike, and were thanking God that liquor was- not being sold., Mr. Kennedy further complains tliat I did not mention the fact that the. Supreme Court in the State of Michigan on February 20 declared, "that the possession of intoxicating liquors was not unlawful." Well now, I was in Wellington at that time, but anyhow, 1 never claimed that tho Prohibition Act of America made it unlawful to have liquor in possession, only that it was unlawful to manufacture, or sell, import, or export. Tho following extracts, published in tho American issue, however, throw a I littlo light on tho statements of tho Now York correspondent in February i fast. "Mostly Aliens—Mr. J. Z. Zabel, county clerk, who has closoly analysed' tho records of tho county gaol of Monroe County,' Midi., said that 89 per cent, of the men arrest**! for smuggling liquor from wet Ohio into dry Michigan wero alieus, and 73 per cent of thorn had olirimed exemption from tho dratt. Ine Vnndorburg County Ind., Grand Jury has returned 17 indictments against former rniloon-koepere and bartondere of Evansvillo, charging them with selling liciuor illegally under tho Tndnina prohibition law, and with maintaining a nuisance." , , ~ • Surely I ought not to bo held responsible for not telling you what the London "Times" of February 14 believed regarding tho Quebec Government. Mr. Kennedy's suggestion that the working! men of Seattlo have become as calves, !)eoaußO they have bad the good sense to drink milk" instead of beer, is surely a reflection upon thorn n.nd an acknowledgment on his part of ignoranco as to the qualities of milk as a food as well as a drink. Snroly Mr. Kennedy's enthusiasm for beer has caused him to look only on one side of this subjoot. Mr. Kennedy e repetition of. a story that a woman wore a speoially-made vest from whron dangled 13 hot-miter bags, each containing a quart of whisky, is unworthy of notice. H Mr. Kennedy allows his leg to b* polled in that manner, ho cant pull mine. There was a time whoii America was lax on the enforcement! of the liquor lawfl, but in many States to-day thov not only confiscate the liquor illegally in possession, but tho volncle as well 'be ifc a, motor-car or other vehicle, awl fino tho person up to 1000 dollars, nnd m&y give him six months in gaol a« well. 1 deny the statement ot Air. Kennedy that there is widespread, wholesale contempt for tho prohibitory enactment which was put forward with tho win-the-war movement. flurty-two Stales havo voted "booze" out quite regardless of the war. Tho war-timo prohibition did not come into force until the first of July. Tho amendment ot tlm Constitution which makes illegal the mannfaoWe, sale, importation, exportation, and transportation of alcohoho

liquors for beverage purposes, was ratified in January last by -15 onl of the -IS States in Iho Union. This will come into forco in Janmiry next, 11)20, and must remain in forco until SG out of the, d 8 Slates will support an amendment of tho Constitution which will supersede this eighteenth amendment, which is not likely "to eventuate for generations, if It'has not only the Congress and tho Sonde but the. bulk of the American people be.hind it. The Hon. W. TI. Taft, formsv President of the United , States, writing for the May issue of "The. Ladies Homo Journal" on "Ja Prohibition a Blow at Personal Liberty?" snys:-"Tlio people iiavo spoken. This is a democracy, lie amendment has been adopted, and with all good citizens I am strongly in ravour of tho'enactment of the most practical laws to secure tlw. rigid, enforcement of the declarations of the amendment This is the duly of every citizen in a democracy. A citizen who is in favour of the. enactment ot only tho laws for which he lms voted, and in tho principle and wisdom of which he agrees, is not a law-abiding citizen of a democracy Ho lias something of the autocratic spirit. He is willing to govern 'but not to be governed. He is not willin« to Dla'y the game according to the rules of" tho game. Therefore whatever mv previous view, I an. .'trongly in favour now of putting the. amendment to a test (is favourable a? possible for its successful operation. Then if my fears prove to be unfounded 1 shall bo the. first to admit this, and bo glad that they have been shown to bo erroneous. Ex-President Taft enumerates the forces that Id to the overwhelming adoption of the Constitutional amendment. After mentioning the Clvnrib, employers, and neighbours of drinkers, he class was gathered from men of all walks of society. Americans in spirit and training, alive to tho e.iirreuts in politics, who resented the political strength, and truculence and the demoralising and corrupting inniMiice in councils, legislatures, and even in Congress of the saloonkeepers and liquor dealers associations, -'working together for ■ the perpetuation of their power and Hie unrestrained pursuit of their business. These have been hoiat with, their own petard and have stirred en opposition f)v their tyranny and outrageous intrigue which has accomplished their downfall. Let Mr. Kennedy and all your nwiitroiis readers quite understand that America' means to secure the supremo position industrially and otherwise, and for that, amongst other reasons, is cut. tin" out "hntae." Will Britain be wise enough in time? Will New Zealand-bo wise enough to vote it out this year? Cuit out its biggest foe to national greatness purity, efficiency, and progress.-! ° m,rtC - ' JOKNDAWSON. Wellington, August 15.