PROHIBITION IN AMERICA

Hokitika Guardian, 15 March 1930, Page 2

PROHIBITION IN AMERICA

DIVERGENCE OF HOME OPINION

Discussing at the Auckland University College one or two of the more mporiant contemporary' social prob ems which America had to lace, D Charles E. Martin, executive secretary of the Institute of Pacific Relations, md Dean of the Faculty of Politico Science at the University of Washing ton, spoke directly, and with an inside knowledge, of the question of prohih iton in his own country.

“America could never he dry,” said the doctor, but he immediately qual ified this statement. In the high places of American public life there were as many different opinions expressed as there were people who opened their mouths on the subject. There wew two. sides of the question, and both seemed to be imeompatible. While i 1 was constituteion-vll.v sound, .it was economically unenforceable. Though an increase in crime of a certain type was undoubtedly attributable to it, yet. none the loss, by it the social and economic status of the industrial labourer had been raised. Its firmest supporters were those whose vision was large in the industrial world. Dr. Martin thought having done this alone prohibition was worth any price which had to be paid.

Unquestionably it had done good i" other directions tho speaker continued. r t. had rooted out what, in his opimoh ’md been the worst evil of the political system—the saloon. In these dens, ho stated, the notion of an underworld began. On the other hand, prohibition did undoiveblv foster a disregard for one uartimilar law: and through this a'disregard for all law. “But.” lie cordinnod. “the Supreme Court bi r the (Tinted States has held that the amendment shall stand, and there is very little likelihood of it being altered. Wo, in America, are like the British people in one respect at least —we do not like to change a thing once we have written it down.”

He considered that eventually the solution, would lie along the lines of a. change in the enforcements law. CRIME ON INCREASE.

Together with the problem of prohibition, Dr. Marlin proposed to- discuss the.enforcement of law in America. Mr Hoover. President of the United States the: speaker said, had referred in a recent .speech to the increase of crime, and those in America were seeking the basic causes of this. Dr. Martin affirmed that to a considerable extent justice had changed to politics, and the public prosecutor had become merely a nuisance.- His was the office most suited for the wreaking of political vengenance.

Many of the lawyers in the United States, pleading in impassioned terms to a jury, thought not of the innocence of the prisoner at the bar, but of tho stir their speech would make and the effect it would have at the next election They dramatised their appeal only for the sound of the words. It was due to men of this calibre, whose place in the senate was the result of their powers of speech rather than their intellectual capacity, that America had held aloof from the League of Nations The notion of America’s responsibility towards the League in a social way was gaining a place in America, though before it would bo recognised as a political aim much time would have to pass. “This loss of faith was so evident,” Dr. Martin continued, “that many people in America were sceptical about the efficacy of the institution of justice. They had begun to take reprisal on their own account, and that was the beginning of resistance to all forms of authority.”

Of the progress of education, Dr. Martin stated that American authorities were continually finding fallacies in their system and trying to correct them. They had come to the conclusion that education was not the panacea for all social ills, nor should instruction be open to all on equal terms. Tt was being found out that by such mass instruction many young people were entering life ill-equipped for that particular line they had taken up. They had received a general education in many things, but for their living they, generally, speaking, had to do only one thing. Further, America now realised that the best education was not the strictly practical one. There had been in America an ep’demic of technical schools, in which youth was trained ns, n mass, and there had been all the resultant loss of the personal touch and the growth of artificiality. Tt was important, to keep in sight the ideal of the individual.