THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXX, Issue 50, 15 October 1914, Page 2

THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

ENGLISH VISITORS DELIVER ADDRESSES. There was a large .attendance at the Town Hall last night to hear the address by Mr Philip Snowden, member of the British House of Commons for Blackburn, on the economic side of the liquor question. The Mayor, who presided over the meeting, in introducing the speakers, said Mr Snowden was a Socialist member of the House of Comomns, and Mrs Snowden was also greatly interested in social work. Both came .with reputations of being*fine speakers and he felt sure they would give Interesting addresses. As to his (the speaker's) position as chairman .if the meeting, it had to he remembered that as Mayor he represented ,11 the citizens of Stratford, and not mv section. . Mr Snowden, who was received .vitli much applause, said he did not Intend to deal with all the contentions put forward by the liquor party. For nstance, it was contended that a Irinker increased his physical capacity and lived longer than an abstainer; and he would not waste time in bringing forward serious reasons to •he contrary. Of a similar nature xas a statement made by a New Zealand liquor journal that the greatest factor in furthering civilisation •aas liquor. A generation ago drinking was universal in England, but it lV as not so now. In the Universities it would be found that many of the men who engaged in the out-door sports were temperance men, and ,ven if they were not they were

compelled to' abstain during the period A training. But there were some ;<mtentions of the liquor party which vore more serious and were more ilausible. There was, for instance, he contention that it was an cn•roachment on the liberty of the subiect to say whether or not lie may 'iave a drink' of intoxicating liquor. Mr Snowden drew a picture of the lifference between savage and civilised peoples, to indicate that in a civiised state the actions of individuals •ore restricted in almost every way .hilo the savage was restricted in uirdly any way. Twenty years ago vhen'an agitation was made in Engand for an eight-hour day for work>rs, they had to contend against the rgument that limiting the hours of -abour restricted the ' liberty of the A-orker, who, it was contended, hould, if ho desired, bo allowed to ontinue working as long as lie liked, 'hit New Zealand had limited the

(>ngth of the day's work. Wiry? because the people knew from previous experience that it was not in the iiteresets of the workers to allow full iborty—thoy knew that limiting the lay's work would greatly increase the rue welfare of the workers. The Manchester school of politics pleaded ror the retention of the system of

jomplete freedom regarding the length jf the day's work, arguing that in ,ime the system of complete freedom vould result in perfect social condi-

tions for all tho workers. But the irue fact was that out of a hundred .yorkers one had an opportunity of uaking a fortune, while the other

linety-ninq wont to a premature

death. Since then there had keen a long series of industrial legislation in England, restricting the hours of labor and laying down conditions of work. New Zealand's Arbitration Act—what was it? It was a law to .•estrict the, right of the worker to strike in a. spasmodic or irritating manner. Ho agreed with the Act |to that extent, but he desired it to je understood that he helieved in the worker having tho right to strike, after going through the for-

malities laid down by the New Zealand Act. In England, when the National Insurance Act came into force, here were five million working men

,vho were members of friendly societies, these societies having done good

vork in an unostentatious manner. But there were another nine million workers who were not members of friendly societies. It could be argued that if a man did not wish to join a friendly society he should lie allowed to remain outside. But Mr Lloyd-George thought otherwise, and it was decided to compel the workers to insure for their future. The worker was even not given the liberty of making the payments to the National Insurance Fund. His contribution was taken from his wages before he received the money. Everybody now recognised that tho State had a right to restrict the actions of individuals when such actions were against the interests of .the State. And if a man's health was injured it was an injury to tlm Slate. They were told that if the liquor trade were abolished many people would be .thrown out of employment and could not ho absorbed by other industries. He drew attention to the difference between the wages paid for the production of liquor and the selling price of it. Quoting from a land agent's advertisement, Mr Snowden quoted a statement that on two succeeding Saturdays a Taranaki hotel took £96 and

£lO3. Not much labor was required to get these returns. In a draper's shop ho was sure it would take six or ten times the labor to secure the same returns. Tt followed, therefore, that if the £4.000,000 annually spent on drink in New Zealand was diverted to othor industries there would bo much more better-paid employment for the workers of the country. Eren if the whole of the monev were snmh in importing <yoods, poorl would bo done. The diversion of the monev now spent on liquor to useful trados would mean not a decrease but a vast;

increased In'the amount oi' la/jor em ployed in the country. Auotlier ar gument oi' the liquor party had re

forence to the amount paid by th< drink traffic to the country's revenue In Xew Zealand at present the traiii' •»avu a revenue of 121,090,000 to th«

country, and sonic people desired to keep tJio traffic, fearing,.that if the traffic was wiped out the revenue would have to be raised some other way. Well, he could tell -them many ways of making up the revenue. They could put a tax on houses of ill-fame (that would raise hundreds of thousands of pounds a year), or on gambling-houses. Those might

make up the revenue, but it was generally recognised that taxation should not be imposed without reference to morality—that it was improper to raise taxation from things which existed to the detriment of citizens. Concluding, Mr Snowden said he had advanced his arguments in no dogmatic manner—he merely put thorn torward so that his hearers might think over them and calmly come to a decision on the question. In New Zealand the people had a unique opportunity in regard to the liquor question, though in England national prohibition would not bo in the sphere of practical polities during the piesent generations. He urged Jus hearers to vote at the coming election; and those who voted for nationil prohibition would have the ■sasiVaotion of knowing that they were voting for the benefit of future generations.

Mr Snowden was loudly aoplauded on resuming his seat.

Mrs Snowden next addressed the meeting, being also applauded on rising to (speak. She said thai, in England there was still a great feel ing against the woman's point of view of political questions, this being due to the long period of political outlawry which, had been the lot of British women. It was only during the past hundred and fifty years that men and women were found together in movements for the welfare of the race. When, through having forages engaged in providing mdenr.i things, even now had more , regard for material things than for thbigs of much greater value. It was no longer ago than 1830 that persons were executed for trifling thefts. Ail down the ages the work of women had been, and would continue to i.e. the same—the bearing and rearhg of children. Men and women developed different moral qualities acoiVlig to their different activities, but, roughly, men were not better than women on the whole—there was six of one and half a dozen of the other. Women dealt particularly with the children, and it was certain that when a woman was called upon to vote as between narrow, selfish material interests and the interests of the children they would vote in the interests of the children. And, the lecturer contended, the bad effects of the traffic were especially-...felt by children. Drinking by women wag. rife in England, and was in evidence even in New Zealand; and if women drank, the maternal instinct would be lessened, and that would then come over the race? While men were allowed to drink women could not Ho stopped drinking—if men had the right to drink, 'then women could not l»e denied the right to drink. The only way to stop women drinking was to vote liquor out of existence altogether. Mrs Snowden concluded with a striking poetic description of the aspirations of the human race.

Mr R. H. Robinson moved a hearty vote of thanks to the speakers, which was seconded by Mr C. D. Sole, and carried by acclamation.

Mr Snowden suitably responded, and on his motion a vote of thanks to the Mayor for presiding was passed. The Mayor deserved thanks for his courage in setting aside his personal predilections and doino; his civic duty in presiding. English Mayors never presided at political meetings or a meeting dealing with political agitations, though Scotch Mayors did so. iln seconding the vote of thanks, Mrs Snowden gave some of her humorous experiences of chairmen.