THE DARE MAJORITY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2252, 25 July 1908, Page 3

THE DARE MAJORITY.

STRONG LANGUAGE BY THE CHRISTCHURCH LEAGUE. A CIRCULAR TO MEMBERS. (Special to “Times.”) WELLINGTON, July 23. Alembers are still being bombarded with communications regarding the bare majority vote .in connection with local option. They are to-day also in receipt of the following circular : “Dear Sir, —The Parliamentary correspondent of certain .newspapers is circulating, on what he alleges to be the "authority of some members,- that they have been pledged to support the three-fifths majority principle, and that they would therefore be going back on their pledges if they supported the Bill providing for an absolute majority vote on the licensing issue. We are aware that when there was danger that the time between the polls Would be extended to six or nine years and there was a possibility of clause 9 being enacted, the party asked members to resist this retrogressive legislation and maintain the law as it stood. The party as far as we are aware, never asked that the threefifths majority principle should be supported gainst that of the democratic bare or absolute majority. We would esteem it -a favor if you would l answer the enclosed question. I am, sir, yours faithfully, C. Henderson, Secretary for the Executive of the .Christchurch Prohibition League.” The question enclosed with the circular is as follows: “Wore you ever requested by the prohibition party to pledge yourself to support the three-fifths principle as. against the absolute or bare majority P” In a resolution- nearly -half a column long, passed by the Christchurch Prohibition League, reference is made to the “nameless politicians” who “arc circulating subterfuges.” I can only assure the League that the politicians referred to are not “nameless”, they are amongst the straiglltest going and most respected men in Parliament. Some of them -are prohibitionists and, as already stated, have contributed to the funds-of the party. That snob men should be accused by a prohibition league of making statements that are “utterly false" is go-, ing just -a little too far. The resolution referred to says: “Not a single member has had the courage or the honesty to meet the question fairly and squarely and say that he was pledged by the prohibition party to support the three-fifths as against the bare majority and the subterfuges are as cowardly as they are untrue.” This is very strong language to be used against members if there is any untruth or subterfuge it is certainly not 0 n the part of members. The subterfuge is all on the part of the League. The first two members I met to-day are replying to the League’s circular stating that thev are pledged to the three-fifths majority. They were asked to pledge themselves to the Act as it stood on the eve of -the last election, and did so. Thev cannot go hack on that pledge. ‘Other members-have, treated tho circular with contempt; in other words thev have put it in the waste paper basket. It- is very generally recognised that the move of. the Christchurch leaguers is a. mistake and that it has already had the effect of damaging the cause. So much is this so that two members who are bare majority men and friends of the party, informed me that the party will be advised not to go on with the Bill this year.