PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 2348, 29 October 1921, Page 1

PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

SOME UNBIASSED VIEWS.

In view of the conflicting reports which are continually coming to hand regarding the efficacy of the prohibition laws in America, the observations of an unbiassed visitor in the person of Mr. Alfred Seifert, of Palmerston North, who recently returned from the United States, throws a clearer light on the subject. In conversation with a “Manawatu Times” reporter Mr. Seifert mentioned that prohibition was a much-discussed question in America, and the views expressed on it were very conflicting. “I have been told by some people,” he said, “that prohibition is responsibla for the wave of crime that is now sweeping over America, and have also heard it blamed for the trade depression. Others have told me that this is all nonsense, and that the trade depression and crime are entirely due to the reaction from the war. With this latter view, I am inclined to agree. At the same time, it is rather remarkable that crime has not decreased in a greater ratio in America since prohibition came into force. Some people believe that licenses will again be granted in America to open the saloons, but I do not think they will be granted again for the next 100 years. At the same time, I believe it is probable that the sale, under certain conditions, of light wines and beers will again be There has been a great deal of talk about the “home brew” in America, and from all accounts this is carried on vei - y extensively, even by people who never drank before. I must say, however, that there was no evidence to prove that prohibition has done any harm to the country. One good feature I noticed was that the ships now have no trouble in getting their crews away from the American ports. I was told that a good deal of drink is smuggled into the country by the crews of boats arriving at the American ports, but the Customs officials are continually on the look-out for “boot-leggers.” In reply to a question as to how the general public were keeping to the law, Mr Seifert mentioned that greater trouble was experienced in the States of New York and Illinois, where the population was believed to be in favour of the license, than in other parts of the country. The people there are apparently resentful of the law having been brought into force by a constitutional amendment, instead of the popular vote, especially in view of the fact that each of these States has a very large population—actually larger than that of Belgium. In Chicago, the law is made harder to enforce, especially as it is believed that the police are largely in sympathy with liquor adherents. On the other hand, the Southern and Western States, with a smaller population, were in favour of the measure.

Mr Seifert found prohibition popular with the manufacturers, who welcomed it, not on sentimental grounds, but for reasons of efficiency. They found it easner to run their business with liquor out of the Way. “I asked one big manufacturer whether he thought prohibition would ever be carried in England,” Mr Seifert remarked, “He said, ‘They will have to carry it if they want to hold their own with us.’ As I mentioned before, however, the difference of opinion is very conflicting as to whether prohibition is a benefit to the country.”