AN INTERESTING CORRESPONDENCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 505, 7 November 1928, Page 14

AN INTERESTING CORRESPONDENCE

TWO EMPLOYERS OF LABOUR ON PROHIBITION BOTH 'FORMERLY FAVOURABLE Louisville, Kentucky, May 15, 1928. Dear Mr. Raskob, From your statements to the "New York Times" of April 23, you have evidently given this matter of prohibition a great deal of thought. Being an executive and an employer of labour, and having been an advocate, like yourself, of prohibition for many years, I must admit that the opposition of so many reputable leaders of public opinion in America against prohibition has given me no little concern. I am truly interested in learnihg what you have in mind as a substitute for prohibition. Yours very truly, (Signed) P. H. CALLAGHAN. Note.—Mr. Callaghan is president of the Louisville Varnish Co., of Kentucky. Mr. John J. Raskob is president of General Motors Corporation, and a director in a number of other corporations which in the aggregate employ over 300,000 workmen. Mr. Raskob has a family of 12 children ranging from 5 to 12 years of age, and what he says in his reply to Mr. Callaghan is that the thing that gives him the greatest concern is that both his employees and his children are developing "a thorough lack of respect for our laws and institutions, and that there seems to be a growing feeling that nothing is wrong in life except getting caught.” Further, in the course of his reply to Mr. Callaghan, he says this:—"A large number of people feel that a majority in this country have no more right to curtail their freedom with respect to drinking beer, wines or even spirits than they have to deny free religious worship. These people feel they do no wrong in the eyes of God when they buy and consume beer, wines and liquors, in spite of the law . . . “The menace of prohibitory laws is the spirit of intolerance underlying their adoption and this is bound to result in rebellion. “My whole desire and effort is to try to bring my fellow-citizens back into the atmosphere that gave birth to our Constitution—an atmosphere of brotherly love which spells tolerance and a keen respect for ourselves, for each other, for our laws, institutions, and, above all, respect for our God, our liberty and our freedom. “No one can survey or study the results of the Eighteenth Amendment and the Volstead Law during the past nine years without coming to the conclusion that their administration has been a complete failure. “I thoroughly resent the charge by over-zealous prohibitionists that those of us engaged in trying to bring about the repeal or amendment of the ,Eightheenth Amendment and the Volstead Law are in any way lawbreakers or show any lack of respect for our great Constitution. On the contrary, we are engaged in a noble effort to restore to our people a feeling of independence and liberty and the right to the pursuit of happiness so earnestly sought, prayed for, and finally secured after the great revolutionary war. “Let us not have another revolution or rebellion, which is certain to overtake us unless we learn how to build our laws on the foundation of honesty instead of intolerance, and also let us appreciate the fact that the might of the majority or an organised minority is not necessarily right . . . “My judgment, is that both "parties will dodge this whole liquor question by inserting some innocuous plank in their respective platforms at the June conventions. “Sincerely yours, “ (Signed) JOHN J. RASKOB.” ; Both political parties dodged the ; whole question. The majority in each j camp realised, as does Mr. Raskob, \ that prohibition has demoralised the social and public life of America, and that it has proved a costly experiment fraught with evil. A decisive majority for continuance is required to remove this menace from New Zealand,—Advt.