THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4497, 29 November 1922, Page 2

THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

MR. BURKE AT'CENTRAL THEATRE. INTERESTING ADDRESS. The Central Theatre was comfortably filled last evening to hear Mr F. Burke, who is lecturing on "The Failure of Prohibition.” His’ Worship the Mayor, Mr, P. E. Brenan, presided, and in introducing Mr Burke to the audience said that the lecturer was an ex-naval officer of the British Navy who had rendered conspicuous service throughput the whole of the war period, and one only had to look at the large wpiuid in his neck to be reminded, of his war activities, including the famous Zeebruggee engagement. His Worship mentioned that the public of Paeroa had already had the views of prohibitionists put before them recently, .and they were now about to hear the other side of the question. He appealed for a good hearing to be accorded the lecturer, more especially when his distinguished war service was taken into account. (Applause.) On rising to commence his address Mr Burke was received with applause. He proved, himself a brilliant and effective orator, and was listened to with, rapt attention throughout, his forcible remarks and facts receive ing hearty applause from time to time.

Mr Burke said he was not present as an advocate of drink. He was there to state the case.against prohibition and to emphasise the point tjiat prohibition brought about by legislation was wrong. There had always been a liquor question, and. for the last 100 years the question had agitated. the minds of many people. The movement began with temper.ance reform, and temperance reformers taught that in order tp live up to the ideals of Christianity people had to be temperate in all things. The idea developed and the temperance refomers became numerically strong, and when their strength was realised the prohibition movement took shape as 1 a political force. The prohibition movement in America, said Mr, Burke, commenced with the formation of the Anti-salpon League; It was a libel on New Zealand to compare the saloons of America with the hotels of New Zealand, for 80 pei’ cent, of the American saloons were little better than houses of ill-fame. Mr Burke said that Rockefeller and. otiher millionaires of America contributed largely to the funds of the anti-saloon workers. Rockefeller had bought every drug store he could in America, and to-day was selling drugs that contained up to 40 per cent, of alcohol. Mr Burke said lie refused to admit that these financiers were out tp benefit the workers'. (Applause.) The prohibition movement in America, he said, emanated from the antisaloon workers. The movement created a great feeling of resentment among moderate drinkers, who objected to having their domestic lives regulated by legislation. There was a great difference between the meaning of prohibition and the nieaning of temperance, said Mr ; Burke. Temperance was a virtue. Prohibition meant that the people would'have to have a policeman at their front doors to make them obey the law. Prohibition was an extreme measure brought forward by extremists. The temperance movement was promoted by education and by instilling into the minds of the people the danger of excessive glcoholism. Extremism affected the temperance movement in ■the same way as extremism affected the Labour movement. The Labour party used to rank among its members many of the intellectuals of the day, but when the extremism and Bolsihevism developed in the Labour movement many of these men withdrew their support. The trouble with Bolshevism and extreme Labour .was that they were trying to bridge a gulf at once that would take a century by the process of evolution.

Mr Burke warned the people against the danger of establishing a. 'precedent by m,aking prohibition of the liquor traffic law, for by establishing a precedent with regard to one thing it would not be difficult to ■ijollow that precedent with regard to other things, such, as smoking. Mr Burke referred to the Corruption that existed in political spheres in America, and said in support, of this allegation that in the State of California a plebiscite was .taken on the question of prohibition in 1919. The people voted for continuance by a majority of 300,000 ; yet two months later their two representatives' in the Senate voted in favour of America going dry. There was only one word for such an action, and that word was corruption. The Christian people of the world to-day were divided into sects, and the greatest problem the ministers .of religion had was how to fill their churches. The division among the people was being further accentuated by the liquor question. The politics of the country were permeated with the liquor question. The average politician would not say whether he was for or against prohibition. The politician would say that the electors would have an Opportunity of voting on the question. There were a number of men in NewZealand who had secured their seats in Parliament because of the views they had regarding prohibition. In a young nation like New Zealand it was regrettable that men should be returned to Parliament because of their views on prohibition, instead of being elected on account o>f their ability, honesty, and integrity. Mr Burke appealed to his hearers to kill, the prohibition movement in order that New Zealand politics might be cleansed. It would be better to let flic people ■evolve into a completely sober nation by education, said Mr Burke. One of the worst things that was taking place in the world to day was that ministers of religion were using their pulpits for political purposes. He did not like the pulpit being turned into a political soap-box. (Applause.) The speaker contended that God had left people with certain temptations to face. According to the Divine plan the beautiful vines were grown to

bear the glorious grapes for the manufacture of nice wine. No man or woman had the right tp say that the Creator of the world did wrong in producing these articles for thousands of people to enjoy. Prohibition was opposed to the Divine plan. Any Christian who voted for prohibition confessed that Christianity was' bankrupt. By the way in. which people resisted the temptations of this life so would they be rewarded or punished in the life to come. Mr Burke said the prohibitionists made a great plea for; prohibition on behalf of the little children and the men and women who could not help themselves. The lecturer declared that he denied the suggestion that because lie took a glass of beer he had no love for humanity. There were thousands of men, moderate drinkers, who were staining examples of good citizenship, while he knew of many prohibitionists who were not the fathers they should be. It could not be claimed for prohibitionists that the best intellects of the world came from prohibition families. The leaders of the world to-day were not total abstainers. All the people who had done anything in this life enjoyed their glass of beer. Dealing with’ the economic aspect, Mr Burke remarked .that it h,ad been said that drink was largely the cause of the slums in the large cities. This was untrue. Eighty per cent, of the poverty that existed was due to accident of birth. People were born in slums without education and opportunity to get out of slum life. The speaker said he was not there to bolster uj> the trade. He wanted the prohibitionists to allow him to govern his own domestic affairs and life. He said there was' such a thing at the present day as dress drunkenness,, and he accused drapers, such as Geo. Fowlds, Ltd.., and others, of supporting the prohibition movement for their own ends—a case of vested interests again. The gorgeous displays' in some of the Auckland shpp windows were enough to breed dress drunkenness, and drapers were trading on the fact that women naturally wanted to look nice and be fashionable, and very often girls in the lower walks of life, earning small wages, were tempted to commit petty thefts and so on to bigger things, and yet drink was blamed as’ the cause pfi all crime. These same big drapers, Mr Burke continued, had, during the last election, formed a band of efficiency men, but what had they done ? fie asked. They did absolutely nothing to counteract the extreme profiteering in drapery. Had they published an account of their stocks of drapery the public would have known how long it would have been before the stocks would be exhausted. Instead of doing that they created a ring and alleged a shortage of stocks and reaped in many instances 460' to 609 per cent, profit. People were ever ready to say that brewers were profiteers’, but the speaker contended that if. a committee could be formed and the business books of some of the drapers were compared with those of a brewer, the former would be ashamed to h.ave their profits published. Men who were confirmed drunkards could not be cured by a stroke of the pen, said Mr Burke. Such, men had a moral kink. Men who needed prohibition tp help them confessed openly to the possession of a weak will, and it was not right that, men of such calibre should be permitted to legislate for men who could control themselves. Mr “Pussyfoot” Johnson, Mr Burke said, he regarded as a hypocrite, and a paid professional Yankee agitator, and was as incompetent a man as he had ever met and the worst possible advertisement America could! have produced. The speaker did not think the prohibition party of America could foist “Pussyfoot” on the world as a Napoleon of oratory, or organisation. Mr Burke- quoted a statement alleged to have been made by "Pussyfoot” and published by “Harper’s Weekly,” in which he was reported as having said that prohibition could not be successfully enforced in America, and yet he comes to New Zealand as an advocate of such a futile measure. The speaker accused him of, out and out hypocrisy, and stated that Mr Johnson had refused to meet him on a public platform. It was a great pity that America had not been as keen to send her boys out to assist on the Gallipoli Peninsula as she was to send people to interfere in the domestic happiness’ of this country, said Mr Burke. Tn conclusion Mr Burke described the issues that would be put before the voters of this electorate on December 7, and asked them tp vote continuance and local restoration and give prohibition a real good “stpushing." He pointed out how under the present condition of local option money was being freely circulated and spent in towns outside of Paeroa, and he asked why this money should not be spent in the town. He considered that now was the time to carefully put aside all prejudices and vote continuance from a national point of view. The speaker said he had seen positively for himself the futility of prohibition, and he appealed to tlie audience as intelligent people to consider prohibition a farce and to exercise the duty they owed to their town and to New Zealand as a whole.

Mr Burke resumed his seat to the accompaniment of prolonged applause. The Mayor said that Mr Burke would welcome any questions and would do his best to answer them. None were forthcoming, and there was a small amount of heckling from the liquor supporters, by calling out to some of the local prohibitionists' by n.ame, and suggestions wore made that they were not "game” to get up and face Mr Burke. At the call of the Mayor Mr Edward Edwards proposed a hearty vote of thanks to Mr Burke for his interesting and helpful address and for the wav the plain unvarnished facts had been put before the audience. The seconder’s voice was drowned in the applause that followed the resolution. Tn rising to thank the gathering for the appreciative way they 'had received him, and also for the vote of thanks, Mr Burke said he was very disappointed indeed that there were no questions' forthcoming. It appear-

ed to him, lie said, that the prohibitionists were dying, or were not game to face him, but he understood the tactics of the prohibitionists: they would wait until he had left the town, and then he would be Attacked about what he had said. "Don’t let them get at me behind my back,” ne said, “but ask .them why they did nbt question me while I was here.” in conclusion the lecturer thanked His Worship for presiding and also the audience for their quiet and patient hearing.