OUR READERS’ OPINIONS

Gisborne Times, Volume LXI, Issue 9854, 6 November 1924, Page 3

OUR READERS’ OPINIONS

AMERICA AND. LIQUOR. (To the Editor.) • Sir, —In your issue of October 16th you published certain observation's by Mr (J. R. Russell, of Christchurch, in regard to Prohibition in the United States. Perhaps you will kindly allow mi to make one or two comments on some of the statements Mr Russell has made. For instance, he says that there is still plenty of liquor in the United, States and if a personwanted liquor he could always get it, say, within half an hour of reaching a town. The balance- of evidence is against Air Rns-sell. For example, Sir George Fenwick was recently in the United States, and he wrote to the Otago: Daily Times, of which lie is a director, giving an account of liow ou’e of the New Zealand party iracte an effort to get a drink in San Francisco. Sir George says, “All his enquiries ended fruitlessly,” and also “he consequently decided not to trouble further in the matter.” Moreover the American press reported in July that Captain N. F. AY. Rocky, a director of the Perfection Scotch Whisky Co. visiting the United States declared that there was not a drop of good Scotch whisky to he found in the States. He announced that his company had invented a special bottle with the idea of preventing bootleggers filliiig bona fide Scotch whisky bottles with noxious bootleg. Mr Russell says a. great many people keep- wines and_spirits in their homes. That they are perfectly entitled to do if they acquired their stocks before National -Prohibition. They have the right to keep it and to serve it if they wish in their own homos. The Public; Health Department in' the United States has warned the public repeatedly that not more than 1 per cent, of the bootleg liquor being sold was fit to drink. This includes the alleged genuine whisky referred to by Air Russell. So much for whisky. Air Russell mentions women’s clubs in Philadelphia that are alleged to have sent a petition to the State Leg/i lature asking them to try to secure a modification of the Volstead Act because they have found that their husbands were drinking a greater amount of liquor than before Prohibition came in. That kind of petition is a- comnionpla.ee of liquor propaganda. What is more interesting and sigi.'ifirant is that the General Federation of AYomien’s Clubs, representing over two million members, passed resolutions for Prohibition law enforcement and also opposing any light wine and beer programme. - In addition, the Women’s Committee of 5 000 in California took a'similar lino. The Women’s National Committee of Law Enforcement, of which Airs Pinchot, wife of the Governor of Pennsylvania, is a member, are also behind the Prohibition Law.

Air Russell’s position in regard to statistics is curious. He says statistics are not reliable and then invites us to believe that statistics for lunatic asylums show an increase amongst people who have gone insane- through drinking bad liquor. Dr Horatio Pollock, who is in charge of-statistics for all the hospitals and asylums in New York State, showed some time ago that whereas in 1917 the number of alcoholic admissions to the hospitals of the State were 594. in 1920. the first Prohibition year, they were only 122.

Air Russell did not say whether he had personally investigated Government control in Canada ; but he is quite definite that there is less drunkenness and intemperance under Government control than under Prohibition. If that were so the people of the United States would he clamoring for Government control in place of Prohibition. Neither of the great political parties can bo induced to adopt a “’wet” plank in their platforms, ar.d the reason why they cannot be induced is given in a.n editorial printed in “Organised Labor” for July 26th, a journal owned and controlled by the Labor Unions in San Francisco, which until this particular issue had editorially supported Air Gompcrs in his effort to get beer and light wires. I may. fitly close by quoting from that editorial:

“Prior to the meeting of those great political conventions, a- great hue and cry was raised against Prohibition. AYe were told that a demand would be made on- each political party to write in a “wet” plank in its platform. It was intimated that the party refusing to do so would be repudiated by the people. ‘ AYc have carefully studied the platforms of all of the political parties, and find that they are all in favor of Taw enforcement,’ but have not a word to say in favor of modifying or repealing the Prohibition constitutional amendment. AA c are quite sure that if the men who guided the destinies of. those great political Conventions had felt that a majority, or even a- large minority, of the people were against Prohibition there would have been a “wet” plank in the platforms of the- political parties.”

I think you will agree that Air Russell, during his live years residence, has failed to get anything like a balanced view of American conditions or American sentiment.—l am, yours, etc., J. AIALTON MURRAY, Assistant Secretary.

[AYc arc sorry that Mr Murray wishes to draw this journal into the matter of his dispute with Air Russell. It is certainly the case that we cannot oblige him by stating that wo share Jiis opinion that Mr Russell, after five years’ residence in the United States, “failed to get anything like a balanced view of American’ conditions or American sentiment.” What can be said, and is said on all sides, is that the doing away with the saloon system in America, was a good thing. _ The result of the experiment of trying to wring America dry is, however, a matter on which opinions vary. Air Russell came to the conclusion that there is still plenty of liquor in the United States for those who want it. This is denied bv Mr Murray. Seemingly he has forgotten that ' noted New Zealand advocate of Prohibition told members of the New Zealand Alliance- at AA 7 ellington (vide Evening Post report) that a visitor to America, had informed him “that everybody told me that one could get any quantity of liquor, but, when I asked for liquor, there were always difficulties in the way.” “That statement,” remarked Mr Fowl els, “would embodv the experience of most people travelling in America.” AVe- .should ray tlia.t the hulk of the electors of this country will appreciate that contention in its true light. It simply means this—we are, of course, prosum in sr that the 'people Mr Fowl chi (a.nrl the visitor he mentions) associated with were truthful people —that there is -no honor for visitors known to hold" Prohibition svmpathics. If what everyhodv told them v.w-s something that is untrue then it does rot say much for tho veraeitv of the average American. —Ed., G TR