PROHIBITION

Gisborne Times, Volume VIII, Issue 549, 20 October 1902, Page 2

PROHIBITION

A HE PLY TO MR EAST. (To the Editor of the Times.) Sir, — Writing in your columns on the lSih inst., Mr East expresses his indebted ness to Mr Crawford for opening up the question of Mr Lysnar’s aolo exposition of tne failure of Piohibition experiments so far, and then in an airy, off hand, illogical, and unsubstantiated string of question, answer, and bold assertion, proceeds to gain a victory over me io a manner, alas 1 too characteristic of the groat temperance leaders. I propose to analyse Mr East's letter, avoiding tho “ snares of fclie unwary ” on the one hand, and the Iconoclastic blindness of the enthusiast on the other. Mr East tails Mr Lysnar’s “ nine points of control ” the wild wanderings of a youthful intellect, likely to create commercial confusion, etc. Most of these “ wild wanderings ” are planks of the Prohibition platform, namely : 1. Break up the monopoly, and all bonafide residents in each locality to determine the number of licenses required. 2. Abolish barmaids, o. Appoint analytical chemists to control purity of liquor supplied. 4. Prohibit youths under 21 from frequenting public-house bars and billiard-rooms, o. Prohibit youths under 21 from being served with liquor. 6. Prohibit any person from loitering in hotels after hours. 7. Penalise hotel-keeper in loss of license for allowing breaches of clause 6. 8. Power, to close offending hotels for one or ruoro

days for breaches of the licensing laws. fi. Restricting service of liquor iu hotels to bar and adjoining rooms, und to meals. The impartial observer will note that these “ wild wanderings ” are nearly all the choicest aspirations of Mr last's own party. Mr East says “ tho trade ” has shown

itself incapable of keeping within the law.

So have clergymen, lawyers, doctors, and every class of the community. Very often without the exigencies of their occupations ' demanding it.” If breaches of the Civil, 1 criminal or moral laws were sufficient to justify tho extermination of tho offending callings, our churches would be first institutions to close down, for their breaches of the moral law have not even “ exigency ”to excuse them. Mr East says : “ Mr Lysnar’s facts misrepresenting the Clutha records are perfectly astounding. - ' First, he attacks a respectable storekeeper for the Christian act of •‘neighborly kindness ” displayed in sly-grog selling, and “ thoughtful minds ” are asked to recognise a want of British fair-play and gracelessness in Mr Eysnar’s reproducing the printed report where this respectable Bally Cluthian was convicted of sly grog selling and fl suppose, if Mr East is right) iu a truly British fashion throws the blame on his own wife. Prohibition logic doesn’t hold water ; alcoholic beverages are barred —conclusion, bottom must be knocked out of the pitcher. Mr East's implied threat that the respectable distance which separates .Mr Guest and Mr Lysnar deprives us of the interesting spectacle of a truly British settlement of the question by the usual fisticuff methods. I personally regret this very much ; I would be on the ground early to get a good place at the ring. The good storekeeper's mistake was changing the grog in his bill. MiEast says 11 that a great deal of capital is made out of the fact that property valuations decreased considerably just at the the time the ‘No License" vote was carried at Clutha." If it is not an argument against closing hotels, it is a curious coincidence. It is still more curious that the place has since stood practically at a standstill and most extraordinary that the blessings of Prohibition did not produce a boom instead of a demoralising slump. Mr East says that the Borough rates at Clutha have been reduced sixpence in the pound since "Xo License ” was carried. | The fact is that when “ no license ” wa carried the rate stood at Is. Next year, to reduce an overdraft, a special rate ofGi was struck for that year oniy. and the rate nf Is has stood ever since. What Mr East calls "the valuation bogie 1 ’ still stands giinning at him, and the Borough valuations, on the Town Clerk's figures, from the first year at Is to the last return given Mr Lysnar at the same rate shows a decrease.

Leaving Mr East's letter for the moment, let us examine Gisborne’s position when “ no license ” is declared. Eight hotels, now estimated at X‘52,000. are reduced in value to, say jE26,000. The premises are forced into other businesses, as their sites make thc-m suitable, the interested owners have to compete with ail existing trades to keep their roofs up; .£829 annually contributed in licenses and rates to the Borough funds and a proportionate amount from country houses to County Council has to be levied on. the ratepayers, All

those now actively engaged in the businesses become competitors in all tiie other callings, producing a business pressure and unhealthy competition, which addi d to increased rates, must depreciate property vames. Tne hotels contribute in the Borough l.j per cent, of tile whole municipal it-venue, and us hotel property is rate 1 f.uni live to six times the rental value fur other easiness purposes, the loss accruing by the .u-.ver rate and the wlioie m tne i'.cense lees must be found by extra Now. Mr East, I will grant there was a d--p: i ss-.ijii m Gi-bornc between 1887 and IS.U). but iu v.u.- saying that properties went down bu per cent. I liiink you exag gerate. Please look up your proofs, lucre are waves of depression the wood over a! intervals, and the cause is not well understood in statisticians, Some attiihute it to -no spots. Gisborne lias been singularly nee from gieut depressions. Une of them might supervene as a “ curious coincidence,” it “no lie ense ” is carried, like Balclutha. Napier is suffering from too much breakwater, high port charges, competition of Hastings, a-id railway facilities to a comparatively free port, Wellington. 'These, I Gunk, fairly account for the depressioi at Napier. So please don’t draw any hasty conclusions that Napier without experimental prohibition excuses the continued downward course oi Balcl-i----tha, which enjoys it, and ought to boom, ii its uitroduction is beneficial. Another fact with a note of interrogation, says Mr East. “Mr Lvsnar says that a ‘no license ’ vote would make men poorer, but loses his memory and tells us wages would go up.” i never heard him say wages would go up if ‘ no license 1 was carried, and he informs me that he did not make such a statement. Mr East asks, “ Would it not he Letter to cease educating uncont-cila-ble habits ?” Cut off their heads and put them on poles, Mr East, lsu,uose is tiie Prohibition method. This being 11 food for thoughtful people ” 1 pass it.

To Mr East’s question, ” Why should a man he made to pay sixpence for a drink '!” Tiie Prohibition legislation lias raised a monopoly in hotels , the owners of hot 1 properties have raised their rents accordingly. Higher rates insurance, and taxes are levied on the trade, and Mr East must blame nis own party foe not being able to get his beer at threepence. Again, “ Why am 1 n t allowed to sell"tlmt which men require to drink V If “no license ” is carried, you can cojiy Mr Guest’s “ neighborly kindness ” method, and supply ad lib. In regard to why hotels should pay 1 cense fees, its origin ■md cause, refer to Green’s short history of the English people ; and the touching anneal to Mr Lysnar’s parental feelings, at the end of Mr East’s letter, nngnt possibly lose :its sting if Shakespeare s advice is horn in mind, “ better suner file ills you have than fly to those you wot not of.” In 'onclusion, I would venture to point out to Mr East that- the “ no license ” vote, in addition to increased rales nnd outness competition, uucsi not effect its purpose in stopping tho consumption of liquor, the rich man’s Club (and possibly a working man’s club, as at Napier), the brewery, free importation and defiance of tiie law without magisterial supervision as at Cintha and King Country, the drinking bar transferred to the home and family circle, police powerless owing to shielding of the informer, and cultivation of deceit and hypocrisy, bad impression on strangers, inferior accommodation for travellers, and other evils in their train. I think I am justified in saying that if it does not effect its avowed purpose to stop the drinking habits and brings worse ovils in addition to those habits tiie present course should bo abandoned and a wiser and more practical scheme formulated to break people off the national drinking customs. Extremists and professional agitators rarely consider local ro quireinents. Here to day, gone to-morrow, no stako in the place; holding up pictures of llio misery of drunkenness, they persuade you that it represents a truo view of your surroundings, and in contrast painting an elysiutn of perfection, inviting you lo band together to charge the Quixotic windmill, and out of tho wreck patch up a golden palace of perfection,, such as the world can only reach by patient and skilful training.—l am, etc., W. F. Crawford.

NO LICENSE. (To the Editor of the Times.) Silt, - We prohibitionists (1 believe I can speak for the great majority) are not prohibitionists and nothing besides. We support prohibition as a powerful moans towards tho attainment of a groat end, namely, the moral and physical betterment of the whole community. Neither Mr Lysnar nor Mr Crawford has produced a tittle of reliable evidence in support of their contention that partial prohibition has already, or would in future, prove more demoralising than existing conditions. Wo believe that the criminal statistics of Clutha, as stated in the Now Zoalend Year Book are correct ; and we ask, if partial prohibition has done this for Clutha what would not completo prohibition do? Is sly-grog selling confined to the Clutha? Thoughtful people have no time to spend in weighing Mr Lysnar’a " mass of evidence” and nine points of control.” Thoughtful men and women have aspirations beyond “ control,” and they are beginning to get the majority to understand that when a traffic needs a license, and the superintendence of Government officials to bolster it into tho position of a lawful industry, there must be a very clearly recognised evil in connection with it. Does tho legal regulation of that evil render it less noxious ? On tho contrary the tendency of tho popular mind being to regard everything legal or moral—it has a most deteriorating effeot on tho young and ignorant of the land. They do not see how that can be wrong which a responsible Government not only permits, hut regulates and controls. For sly grog selling individuals alone are responsible ; for public bars, regulated and controlled, the nation, which sanctions such places, is responsible ; and I, as a citizen, submit that to “ control ” anything in the shape of what is, or may become acknowledged vice, is, and will soon come to be so considered, a monstrous anomaly in a civilized land. Mr Crawford thinks that we, as a people, are too stubborn to he coerced. I thought Mr Crawford was a democrat; that he believed in the government of the people by the people for tho people.” If a threefifths majority of Waiapu’s electors say that they vote for “no license ” where does coercion come in? Mr Crawford’s concluding argument that “ our promising district will be given a bad name,” in the face of facts and experiences, which it would bo tedious to reiterate here, is only stupid. Countries may “ have been kept back for centuries by narrow and restrictive legislation.” The reform we are now seeking is moral; it is of countries wrecked by immoral indulgence that history has to record its saddest stories. —I am, etc., M. H. Sievwkight. Gisborne, Oct. IS, 1002.