CORRESPONDENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 442, 14 November 1908, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

Wo do not hold ourselves responsible for pinions expressed by our correspondents.

[TO TIIE EDITOR J

Sir.— While listening to your very able and interesting address on No-License, the thought occurred to my mind : Why not banish drink as quickly as possible? I am informed by a prominent NoLicense advocate that with a bare majority vote No-License would have been carried six years ago, but with a three-fifths majority vote it will take twenty-five years to carry No-License throughout the Dominion. Now sir, the No--I,icense advocates draw us a very harrowing picture ot the horrors of drink, crime, misery, degradation etc., (which I do not dispute), and they are putting a great deal of energy into their efforts to secure No-License, which, they hope to make absolute in twenty-five years. Now, if No-License which does not prohibit, is worth waiting twentyfive years for, is not Total Prohibition much more desirable in six years ? If so, why not take a vote of the people on the question. Prohibition or License, if the vote for Prohibition was carried (which it is sure to be), then let the importation, manufacture and sale of all alcoholic liquors cease in five years from the day of taking the vote. 'Phis would be a quick way of carrying a great reform. Within six years for Total Prohibition as against twenty-five years for NoLicense, and this would give all those engaged in the trade five years to get out and not inflict any injustice or hardships on anyone. I submit this for the consideration of those who tell us they are anxious to banish the drink from “ God’s Own Country,” as a means of putting that desire into effect quickly, within six years—nineteen years sooner than they hope to carry No-License throughout the Dominion. Will they try it ? —I am, etc., Bung.