LABOUR TAKES THE GLOVES OFF

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 68, 13 December 1919, Page 10

LABOUR TAKES THE GLOVES OFF

WHAT THE "MAOEILAND WORKER" THINKS OP PROHIBITION AND Tip PROHIBITIONISTS. (Published by Arrangement.) One of the most surprising incidents in a week crowed with incidents has been a remarkable editorial with regard to prohibition which appeared in the official organ of the Labour Party—tho "Maoriknd Worker." Tho fact' that this iournal-rwhich probably carries more weight and influence with a speoifio class of the community than anv other naper in the Dominion—should I>e prepared to allow its editor to make so strong an appeal is but another proof of tho steady swing of popular opinion in favour of ffivinj* prohibition a trial— especially lis it costs nothing to do so. Tho editorial reads as follows:— Out With the Liquor Trade. Tho liquor traffic must bo destroyed. On December 17 tho electors will bo criven a chance to wipo out tho infamy of the open bar, and we hope they will use it effectively. This noxious trade, as it is conducted is an open sore on the body social. The peoplo havo the, choice of voting for the liquor trado as it is, for .State purchase and control of the trade, and for prohibition. We take it for.gmnteo: that labour supporters will vote against continuance aud for State purchase and control or for prohibition. As between the last two issues, it has to be borne in mind that a vote for State purchase carries with it compensation to "The Trade," which means from .£10,000,000 to .£15,000,000. Is the trade worth this to the State? Prohibition is a drastio remedy, doubtless, but it resembles in this respect the reforms demanded by Labour. Tho moral effect of it would be a great asset to Labour, as it would' accustom the people, intensely conservative liko all British communities, to revolutionary reforms. It, mav be doubted, of course, whether tho people are prepared to go tho length' of prohibition, but it is well worth a trial. For the nest three years social woblems will face the people, calling for a clear head, and with the liquor trade shelved, the way would be clear for national stock-taking, and tho Labour movement would be justified in calling on prohibitionists to support other lnuch-iicedeo: social reforms. Besides, even the temporary reign of prohibition would have aii immense educational value, and it is safe to say that even if tho people were not prepared to continue nrohibition they would never go back to the oucn bar, or sanction so morally indefensible a nroposition as compensation to the liquor trade, licensed as it is from vcar to year only. As a means of national discipline, we believe prohibition would bo of great value to tie State, apart from its gain to the national health and wealth, ana would react most beneficially on tho Labour movement, which is sorely hampered by such vested interests as those of tho liquor trade. Theso views, of course, aro the editorial views of "Tho Worker," uttered in the exercise of its undoubted right to an individunl'opinion, and are not to be' understood' ns being those of the Labour l'artv. which is neutral on this question, leavine the matter to be decided by the electors. We hope that Labour supportera will not hesitate to vote against continuaneo in any easo, and thus remove one of the worst stumbling-blocks in the Dath of Labour.