PROHIBITION IN MAINE.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 433, 24 January 1912, Page 6

PROHIBITION IN MAINE.

The recent vote in Maine on the prowosal to repeal the prohibitory clause of the State Constitution is regarded with a good deal of dissatisfaction by Mr Arthur Shervvell, M.P., whose writings with regard to temperance reform are widely known. Mr Sherwell says that the poll has created a situation of great difficulty and etnbarrassent for the authorities. "A majority of 700 in a total poll of 120,948," he states, "is clearly not a sufficient mandate for a drastic law which previous experience has conclusively shown cannot be enforced successfully in the urban districts of Maine.' Prior to September the friends of the law could claim that it had behind it the authority of 70,783 votes out of a total of 94,594 cast in 1884, when it was last submitted to a referendum of the people. But with the voters evenly divided and the verdict of the towns "overwhelmingly against the law," successful enforcement of prohibition on a Stats basis "would appear to be impossaible." Mr Sherwell's analysis of the returns shows that of the twenty small cities and towns in Maine nineteen gave majorities for the repeal of the prohibitory clause and one endorsed the law by a majority of only 96 votes. The larger centres cast 41,623 votes 27,053 in favour of repeal and 14,570 against. Mr Sherwell's opinion is that a system of local option is much preferable to a scheme that "overrides local opinion and imposes a remedy which "is deliberately evaded or ignored." The vote in Maine," he says, emphasises afresh the difficult problem of the town. It points, to the wisdom and necessity of a broad policy of reform which will make progress possible along lines suited to the varying conditions and needs of different communities. It is not wise for any reformer to, and at least of all a temperance reformer, to attempt to stereotype the methods of reform." Mr Sherwell will be disappointed to find that New Zealand has shown a disposition to turn from local option to national prohibition, though no doubt he will realise t hat the Dominion and the American State do not supply parallel cases. His own inclinations are towards some form of State or municipal control of the liquor traffic, and we have no doubt ourselves that this will be the ultimate solution of an extremelv difficult social problem. In the meantime the great majority of the reformers are working along different !ine3, and we do not wish to prejudice their efforts by introducing another issue; hut we can see no reason why "State Control" should not take the place of "Reduction" on the ballot paper and be sbumitted to the electors with "No-license" and "Continuance" under a preferential voting. Lyttelton Times.