Correspondence

Te Aroha News, Volume XXII, Issue 42795, 24 October 1905, Page 2

Correspondence

W« do not ho’d ourselves responsible for the opinions expressed by our cori respondents.

To the Editor Sib, —To strike out the two bottom lines, or the top line ? That is the question, i With your permission, I should like a say on it. Now what about the conflicting views of the brewers, Leffingwell, Dixon Ward, etc., on the one hand, and Mrs Harrison Lee, Woolley, Isitt, J. T. Brown, etc., on the other? Whom are we to believe? What, for instance, about prohibition in America ? Is it an unmitigated curse, or is it largely a blessing ? Well, I thought I would investigate a bit for myself on this point first. And this I find, that on the whole, the statements of the cold water people are the more reliable. I havelpossessed myself of Rowntree and |Sherwell’B much-quoted book, and waded through a lot of it. I have read a

book called “The Master Method,” by Guy Hayler. This is one of the latest productions on the subject. It is prefaced by a commendatory note, by the |Dean of Durham, in which Mr Hawler’s fitness for the work of investigation is set forth. After the discussion caused by the publication of Rowntree and Sherwell’s book, Hayler took a prolonged tour of inquiry through the United States. The title of the book “The Master Method ” indicates the result of his search after the truth. He believes that the direct veto is the best way yet tried of dealing with the liquor problem. I have read much more from many sources anent this subject. I have tried to find out the truth about Clutha, Mataura and Ashburton. Of this I am convinced, that we are being treated —on the platform and through brewers’ advertisements in the shape of insets, to a mass of misrepresentations. Take an example: We are told that seventeen American States have tried Prohibition, and that twelve of them have returned to license. This, Sir, is a statement evidently intended to mislead. As far as I can discover, not one has returned to license. Twelve have substituted Local Option for State Prohibition, which puts the boot on the other foot. And there are only ten States in the lUnion that have not either State Prohibition or Local Option. And in tbwty-five States which have Lot al Option, there are 4500 towns, and 400 entile counties, where the drink has been voted out. I fancy it will be a long time before this will be the case in the big cities, but in many of the large tows and rural districts, drink is vetoed effectively, with magnificent results. It is evident that in the United States there is a wide and rapidly increasing area where No-license has come to stay. The result of ray inquiry thus far is, that though I do not always approve of some of the methods of the No-license party, I am with them henceforth on the main question. They are at least disinterested, and their statements are founded mostly on facts. I have found many of the statements of the liquor party to bo anything but reliable. I suppose we could hardly expect people content to earn part of their living in the way they do, to be over scrupulous in maintaining their business. I am, etc., An Electob.