PROHIBITION ISSUE.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 October 1922, Page 2

PROHIBITION ISSUE.

MR JOHNSON AT OPERA HOUSE. There was a large attendance at tho Opera House last night to hear Mr IV. E. Johnson, the American prohibition speaker. Mr Moses Ayrton, West Coast Organiser of the N.Z. Alliance, occupied the chair, and briefly introduced the speaker. Mr Johnson said be was proud to be in New Zealand. His mission here was to instruct, and not to advise or dictate. He was not here to make.' any money out of New Zealand, for his visit was not costing the country anything. He then proceeded to tell of United States’ experiences, and how and why the liquor question was solved and some of the results. Prohibition waist not a novel idea, nor is it, he said peculiar to America. Tho United States had travelled faster than any other country along the road—that was all.'Here, and in many other countries they had prohibition for 15 hours a day, during which liquor may not be procured. In America they had prohibition for 24 hours a day. All countries were grappling with the liquor question and trying to find a way of dealing with the evils of the liquor traffic. No lawmaking country regarded it as a useful business, and all were trying to curtail the traffic, lessen it, or act-

ually prohibit it. America was a®cosmopolitan nation, and it acquired its ideas from all parts of the world. Obtained many ideas in regard to social legislation from New Zealand. It had secured the ballot system from Australia and uses it to this day. Good ideas were part of the work for the betterment of humanity. The United States seized upon prohibition because it was a good idea. Before reaching that conclusion they had tried various ways of grappling with the evjls of the traffic. They had tried in fact for one hundred years without effective re-r" suits. Then came the solution with prohibition. They gave it a try-out in various States for 50 years before finally adopting )ift (universally. Tho signing of the pledge had been tried—but that did not solve the problem. They found that liquor was making the drunkards faster than they could be signed off the drink. They followed a doctor’s methods by the removal of the cause to cure the disease. What l*as been done in the United States, coijtinuedi 'Mir Johnson, has been done by the 110,000,000 people ' themselves. They voted it through

their legislators sent to Congress. Already twelve thousand municipalities and many States had local prohibition, and America quick to see liquor was a failure, was ready to scrap it, and so the licensing system was scrapped. To do so, it was necessary to amend the Constitution, and to do that it was necessary to get peoples’ vo|te,s )!<eipiles,eo;ted (in Con» gress. Thy wanted at least to secure the return of 36 Congressmen, but their appeal to the people gave them 45. State Legislators in favour of the issue, and so prohibition was carried. It wajs thus done by the people’s votes. He admitted that the prohibition law, like any other law. was violated daily. No law ever passed had won universal respect. But the prohibition law was violated less than the excise law before it had been. Mr Johnson then proceeded to deal with newspaper criticism in New Zealand, including .statements regarding the alleged increase in crime. Tho speaker quoted the authority of a reputable judge that there had been a vast .decrease -.in crime,” and that twenty per cent, of the gaols had been closed following prohibition. As to the drug habit, it was less Wj*w in the days of liquor, when many institutions now closed, were in existence to deal with the unfortunate lictims. As to the revenue question, the liquor revenue received never yielded enough to pay for the administration of the liquor control. Under prohibition, the wages men were able to buy their own homes, and to create rateable wealth. There was a great saving in the closing of gaols now unnecqssary .and in the closing of workhouses, and similar institutions. One effect of prohibition was the overcrowding of the schools, because parents were now saving money and it did not necessitate sending the children out to work as formerly when so much of tlie earnings went in drink. The news affecting prohibition, cabled out to New Zealand, commented Mr Johnson, was sent merely because' it was unusual, and they should take what was said through those channels with the knowledge in mind that, it was colored to suit the times. Tl{.e speaker next traversed statements by the Revd. AY. Hoathcote, whose versions of some [statements were stigmatised with strong language and flatly contradicted. In concluding, Mr Johnson dealt with the aspect of employment, saying that liquor never produced anything for the country which was not a liability. He detailed hoivv tliosa thrown out of jobs in America received other employment, and the business premises were promptly converted to other issues, and often at better wages and rents. Mr Johnson concluded an hour’s interesting address, delivered i(n a steady flow of speech without the exercise of oratory, by leaving to the people tlie responsibility for the 1 cLsion of the issue in December next. In reply to questions, Mr Johnson said Mr Gompers, the U.S. Labor lead er was not in favour of prohibition, but. his followers were. Personally, lie (Mr Johnson) was a Presbyterian, and the prohibition law did not interfere 'with wine for sacrament. In answer to the query whether he was a total prohibitionist, Air Johnson said he was out to stop tho business of making men and women drunk. On a further question J MV Johnson said America had betin delayed a year by the liquor traffic in getting into the war. Soma ether minor questions were asked. , 1 Air R. AA’ild moved a vote of thanks to*the speaker for the clear and well balanced .statement given, winch was carried by hearty applause, and tne Chairman announced a collection, ap- ) pealing also for workers to help in connection with the poll, and requesting that names be given to the Keya jack, the local Secretary. *