The Daily News. SATURDAY, APRIL 5. 1919. THE LICENSING POLL.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 April 1919, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, APRIL 5. 1919. THE LICENSING POLL.

Thursday, the 10th instant, will be a fateful day in the history- of New Zealand, for it will determine jvhether the licensed gale pi lifluoi;

is to be continued or otherwise. The poll is different from previous polls, in that the issue will be decided by a bare majority, instead Mediately, instead of after four and a half years, as heretofore; while compensation is to be given if prohibition is adopted. These features mark an important advance in licensing legislation, and it has been brought about not a little by the happenings in other countries since the Avar. Practically the whole of Canada has declared for prohibition, and now the States of America have decided to suppress the liquor trade entirely, while Britain, always tied to and influenced strongly by the liquor interests, has been making experiments, with more or less success, with a view to reducing drinking. In these countries the attitude towards this question has changed as a result of the war, which revealed the weaknesses of di inking at a time when every bit of power and energy was required to defeat the enemy, and the public, which saw its rights and privileges being restricted and taken away in other directions, made up its mind that liquor stood in the way of winning the war, and raised no objection to its being restricted or suppressed altogether. Now that the war is over, they see the necessity for being thoroughly equipped to meet the financial burden, and to win the succeeding trade war; hence there appears no disposition to revert to the old liquor conditions. In New Zealand the hours of the sale of liquor hate been greatly reduced, with no apparent disadvantage to the, community,,and now we have the poll to determine the fate of the srade. The issues are simple enough The voter has to say whether the State shall pay £4,500,000 to end (he trade, or whether another poll shall take place later on in the year without compensation, or State control. The compensation is supposed to represent the differ ence between the present market value of the assets of the trade f ml their value under prohibition. The trade keeps its properties', and receives £4,500,000 because they are no longer usable as licensed premises. Hitherto the trade has been! (given a period of grace of four! and a half years. The £4,500,000; is provided in lieu of that grace, which the trade does not consider equitable, estimating the value of its interests at a much greater figure. The prohibitionist, on the other hand, holds that the trade is being well treated, he never hav- ] ing admitted the principle of com-1 pensation for interests that eamej up for review every three years, j In the event of a second poll being j required, the advantage will lie with the trade, for continuance will be deemed to be carried unless one of the other alternatives secures a majority of all the votes cast, whilst in the event of State purchase being carried, it would have the opportunity of selling its interests as a going concern at full market value, estimated at something in the neighborhood of ten millions. On the other hand, it may have to close down on June 30, without compensation. Next week's poll is clear-cut—liquor or no liquor. The ppll will not be decided either by the prohibitionists or the trade. It will depend upon the attitude of the moderate voter. In the past the latter has hesitated to throw in his full weight with the prohibitionist, because he felt the trade was not being treated fairly in being put out of business without compensation. This objection is now met, while at the former polls the economic factor was not in evidence to the same extent as it is to-day The war has placed a heavy burden upon the country, probably an additional five to six millions a year. When an individual is faced with a heavy and unexpected load he immediately proceeds to see in what direction he can cut down expenses, and where he can increase his earnings. As with an individual, so with a country. New Zealand is in the position of having to reduce its expenditure. No one in these practical days will deny that drinking is wasteful, and, in many cases, harmful to the moral and economic life of the nation, and that it is a big item of expenditure we can most easily dispense with. It involves, moreover, an economic loss, for drinking affects prejudicially the earning capacity of large numbers who are just now required to put their best foot forward if the country is not to break down under its huge financial load. The moderate drinker realises that the country is "up against it" as it never has been before, and that he must sacrifice his own tastes and break off what may to him be <i pleasant social habit for the general good. In the past we have supported State control, believing that by that means the traffic could be better regulated and the abuses abolished, leading to a substantial reduction in drinking and an , altered attitude on the whole question, but we have to confess that the extent of the misery and poverty revealed during the recent epidemic, directly traceable to drink, has convinced us that there is no other course but to suppress the traffic entirely. Anyhow, State control as provided for 1 in the second poll, if such is necessary, is a proposition that cannot , appeal fr> tb» a-veraxe mind, for it

commits the country to an unlimited, expenditure for the purchase of interests that might be wiped out a year or two later. Seasonable compensation is given the trade in connection with next week's poll, and, that being so, the voter need have no qualm of conscience in casting his vote against a trade which the country, against a trade which the country simply cannot afford, socially or economically, to continue,