“PUSSYFOOT’S” PROGRESS

Hokitika Guardian, 16 November 1920, Page 1

“PUSSYFOOT’S” PROGRESS

A STRUGGLE WORTH WATCHING. GLASGOW, Sept. 28. As one who is concerned in the struggle brought about by the Scottish Temperance Act in Scotland, I have had some opportunity of estimating the strength of the forces on either side. A careful consideration of these convinces mo that a very large number of the electoral divisions under the Act will go “dry.” In the first place, there are nearly 300 of these areas which are already “dry,” since they are either included in “Villadom,” to use the Scots appellation for the “black-coated” areas of settlement, or have landlords who believe that the public-house militates against the social amenity and, market value of their estates. Since tlie utmost the anti-prohibition-ist can vote for under the Act is “mb change,” each of these areas must remain dry, whether it indulges in the expensive luxury'of a poll or not. The teetotal organisation will indubitably claim tlie total population of these areas as being on the side of “no-licence.” There are, further, four very powerful influences, acting and reacting in favour of the no-license resolution under the Act. The first of these is that the twelve religious bodies which divide between them tlie adherence of Scottish worshippers' nine at least are avowedly i,i favour of prohibition. The three exceptions are the Romish Church, the British Episcopalians, and, more doubtfully, the Established Presbyterian Church. The Church teetotal bodies are extremely well organised and combine an enthusiasm and religious fervour, amounting at times to fanatical, intolerance, witli a knowledge of human nature and the best method of handling human beings which is occasionally almost uncanny. They organise processions of specially trained and specially (ill-) clad children through the residential districts. These bear banners with such inscriptions as: “Help the weaiis to save Daddy from the curse of drink.” Then we have the new women voters. These are being assiduously canvassed and urger to vo;te “no-license” for the good of their own families, the reputation of their own area, or, more altruistically, for the salvation of tilose less worthy than themselves. The second influence on the side of “no-license” is that of the very considerable section of the community who have always desired prohibition. Next we have the very large number of drinkers, moderate and otherwise, whom the selfishness of some of the publicans lias bitterly offended. These are resolved to “down” the publican in order to teach him a lesson regardless of the consequences to themselves. Finally we have the revolutionary elements, who will act in any way likely to promote discontent and strife, and who, having been told that prohibition caused the Russian revolution, are resolved to try “no-licence” in the hope that it will help oil a.Scottish revolution.