The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1919. AMERICA'S DECISION.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 April 1919, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 1919. AMERICA'S DECISION.

No one who takes an interest in

the liquor question can ignore the

decision made by the United States to prohibit intoxicating drink. In

December, 1917, the amendment to I the constitution which would make

it possible for the whole of America to go dry was passed by Congress, but it would have no effect

unless it were ratified by three-

auarters of the States of the Un-

ion. It was provided that a State

which had once ratified.the amend-

ment could not go back upon its

decision. Seven years was allowed

for the States to decide whether

they would or would not ratify

the amendment. What has hap : pened up to date is that forty-

five out of forty-eight States

have declared in favor of ratifica-

tion ; that is to say, more than the necessary majority has been ob-

tained in an amazingly short time. As the matter now stands, after January 16,1920, it will be illegal

in the United States to manufac ture, import, export, sell or con-

sume liquor "for beverage pur

poses." But even this is not all. for, quite apart from the ratifica-

tion of the amendment to the con-

stitution, a Bill was passed <by Congress as a war measure pro-

viding that wine, spirits and beer

shall not be obtainable after June

30 of this year. Permanent prohibition will probably have come into force before the temporary

war measure has ceased to be operative. It is an amazing act of self

abnegation on the part of a free

people. Nothing like it has ever

been seen before. Russia is no

analogy, for there prohibition was by autocratic edict, not from choice by a free and educated peo-

pie. The Americans, enjoying the (fullest liberty, have made the J choice deliberately. They are no fools, the Americans; on the contrary, they are an intelligent, highly-trained and practical people. What has converted America into voting prohibition? No doubt the examples of the dry training camps and Army in the field were potent examples. But the chief reason is that of the necessity for obtaining economy and efficiency, particularly efficiency. Employers, military commanders and leaders of Labor all joined in the crusade. One correspondent refers to "the workers' own experience of growing bank accounts, of decreasing taxation for police, hospitals and charity, of more money for better living conditions, of happier home lives, of cleaner, more satisfactory chil dren, of infinitely improved industrial conditions due to better Labor leadership and consequently better understandings " Broadly speaking, the American people seem to have satisfied themselves that alcohol is an impediment to that complete efficiency in life and work which is among the foremost of their ideals. It is a wonderful reassurance to the social optimist to see the world's largest democracy—and one that has so many heterogeneous elements so recently derived from more torpid soci eties—looking a moral problem so frankly in the face and not shrink ing from the dictates of its eonscience. In New Zealand there has been an awakening of the Moral conscience on this question, brought home by the war and the epidemic in a manner that it has never been before. The strongest and most influential men in New Zealand to-day are ranging themselves for the first time in the history of the country with the prohibitionists to banish liquor. They are not teetotallers, but they have seen that if New Zealand is to carry its heavy additional war load, and make progress on sound lines, it simply cannot afford to retain the liquor traffic. The com pensation feature has been objected to in many quarters; many : of those interested in the trade j seek to show it is preferable for : the voter who wants prohibition to ' wait until the next poll, when he) 1

can get it for nothing. But thai i& not a sincere argument, for tli< reason that everybody who ha; examined the issues as they stanc in respect of the second poll real ises that there is no chance oi carrying no-license then If there were preferential voting it would be an entirely different matter Then there would be no suggestion of postponing decision on this issue. But compensation'is right and equitable, and permits many who before would never vote nolicense to do so on this occasion with a clear conscience The hotel keepers, owners and all others m terested will be remunerated for their loss if the vote is carried. As for the country being able to bear the cost, one has only to read what Sir' James Allen says on the point.' The cost will not be felt. What will be felt will be the increased efficiency and higher standard of living that the carry, ing of the poll will make possible. We do j not write as teetotallers, but we do saj» emphatieaUjr that

J the position to-day in New Zealand—with the huge war indebtedness, pensions, etc., the need existing for concentration in the development of our resources, and the raising of the standard of comfort of the workerst-is such that we cannot afford to be handicapped by such a luxurious and destructive agent as drink, in its final analysis, undoubtedly is. The considered word of great nations like America and Canada cannot be ignored on this subject in New Zealand at the present moment They have shown the way to national efficiency and national economy.