Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 12 January 1927, Page 2

The tragic deaths due to the drinking of alcohol deliberately “doctored” by the officials responsible for ibe enforcement of the Volstead Act are naturally the subject of heated controversy in America. It seems that, apart from all differences of opinion regarding the use or abuse of liquor, the case against such methods of enforcing ihe law is extremely strong. Apparently we must make exception of such fanatics as Mr Wayne Wheeler, who bolds that: the verdict which a coroner's jury should give in such instances is not ‘‘murder.’’ but “suicide.” But excluding extremists of thin type, we believe thnt such a course as the American authorities have deliberately adopted in.their desperate efforts to lorce prohibition Upon the people is repugnant to tho moral sense of every civilised community. To realise the full implications of this monsiions policy, it is only necessary to attempt to carry the argument to its logical conclusion. 11 it is right and reasonable that officials may poison men and women so as to encourage the survivors in observe the law. it follows that a policeman is justified, for example, in setting dynamite “booby-traps" for burglars, or shooting down, on sight, any pickpocket whom he may catch “icd-handed.” It seems to ns that this is quite an insane perversion ol both legal and moral principles and we do not wonder that tho common sense or ihe conscience of the American people has revolted against if. For obvious reasons it is difficult jo find any exact parallel to this iniquitous business in recent years. But our readers may remember that two or three generations ago. in. Britain, landowners quite commonly set “mantraps” and spring-guns” to dis-nade the general public I coin trespassing on their property. The right of the landlord to the exclusive use and enjoyment of his land was defined and delonded by the law. But the growth of a more humane and better instructed public opinion inevitably resulted in the suppression of such barbarous methods of enforcing respect for Acts of Parliament. Yet the right fo set "mantraps” and “the spring-guns” once recognised and tolerated hv British law, was a very trivial infringement of the rights of humanity and the principle of social ethics, as compared with the right npparentlv claimed By ihe Prohibitionists in the l liitcd States to authorise the Departmental officials to poison everyone who objects oil principle to the ‘‘dry” gospel, or does not agree with Mr Wayne Wheeler about the difference between “suicide” and “murder.” The aiioiincemont that a naiicsating hut harmless substance is to ho added to commercial alcohol to slop consumption shows that protests may have had some effect.