THE BARE MAJORITY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 493, 12 October 1909, Page 3

THE BARE MAJORITY.

A RETROSPECT. The history, and arguments in support of the demands of the temperance reform party for Dominion Option, in addition to Local Option, and the determination of every issue submitted on the voting paper by the majority of those who vote, becomes of practical popular interest in view of the present vigorous re-opening of the political campaign to secure legislative recognition of these demandsThe New Zealand Alliance was instituted in March, 1886. Its avowed object was to secure from the Legislature power for the people, by direct vote, to suppress the liquor traffic. The Licensing Act of 188 1, then in force, gave power to the ratepayers, by the vote of a majority of those voting, to prevent any increase of licenses in a licensing district, and also to elect the licensing committees, which had power to refuse to renew licenses on the ground among others, that they were “not required in the neighbourhood.” The districts were the smallest municipal areas, such as wards, where boroughs were so divided, and ridings of counties. The earliest eforts of tbe Alliance were therefore directed towards obtaining for the ratepayers, with other adult residents to be added to the rolls, the power at the ballot box of direct veto of licenses in their several districts. In February, 1893, the Appeal Court determined that licensing committees could not, as attempted at Sydenham, refuse to renew licenses, which, merely on prohibition principles, were deemed to be “not required in the neighbourhood.”

Early in the same year, the Rev. Edward Walker, .who had in July, 1900, become New Zealand Alliance agent, personally urged upon the Alliance Executive, then meeting iu Auckland under the presidency of Sir William Fox, an entirely new legislative departure by which the licensing districts would be enlarged to the boundaries of the Parliamentary electorates, and the Parliamentary electors be substituted for the ratepayers, with power, by a majority of those voting to prohibit the granting of licenses of any description in the district, the voting to be on parliamentary general election days, and when two-thirds of the districts had carried prohibition, that policy to take effect over the whole country and extend to the importation and manufacture of alcoholic beverages. He was permitted to submit his ideas in the form of the rough draft of a Parliamentary Bill he had prepared, which was carefully discussed at a succession of executive meetings and then unanimously approved with the instruction to him to get such a Bill drafted by a firm of solicitors (Messrs Martin v. and Richmond, Wellington) in form suitable ior presentation in Parliament. From that time the legislative agitation took the wider scope of both local and colonial prohibition by majority of the parliamentary electors. The Bill (the first of its kind and the forerunner of all the party’s policy bills since) was published as a supplement to the Prohibitionist newspaper of July Ist, 1893; and by request of the executive was introduced in Parliament by Sir Robert Stout, but with modifications which he made on his own responsibility including the excision of the provision for colonial prohibition. The Prohibitionist (editors, The Bros., Isitt) said: “When the Alliance was instituted seven years ago, as the only organisation in the Colony existing exclusively to secure the legislative prohibition of the liquor traffic, it was resolved to bring a Direct Veto Bill before Parliament every session until such a bill should become law. This policy the alliance has consistently pursued. We publish iu this issue the bill which the Alliance has prepared for the present session. If it is not passed it Is their intention to make it the test for candidates at the next general election. Messrs Marlin and Richmond have drawn up the bill with great care, the measure shows that much thought has been expended on it. It now remains to be seen whether the temperance societies of the Colony will adopt it or will prefer a simple amendment to the Licensing Act, giving the power of Direct Veto.” In the same year (1893) the Government measure conceded some of the demands of the Bill in respect of local option, but in extremely unsatisfactory lorra ; and iu 1895 the Government brought iu a bill amending the Act of 1893 and including provision for colonial option, both local and colonial option being by a three-fifths vote of the electors. The colonial option clauses passed the Lower, House with practical unanimity, but were thrown out by the Upper House, and the improved but still unsatisfactory local option provisions passed into law. Next session (1896) the Government brought down another bill to restore the colonial option provisions which again passed the Lower House with unanimity, but were again thrown out by the Upper House. Since then the Temperance Party has got no further respecting its demand either that the majority shall decide every issue at the polls nor its demand for a dominion as well as a local option vote. But it has so far educated the country that at the last triennial poll there was a majority for No License of all who voted in 57 electorates and over the Dominion as a whole 53*45 per cent, of the electors voted NoLicense, The party having thus

shown its growing strength and relative position in the country is just now entering upon a new political campaign with the confidence that its demands cannot much longer he refused by the Government or Parliament of this democratic country.