THE POLL.
The result of tlie liquor referendum is unsatisfactory. We had hoped that the merits of the proposal to abolish the traffic on the equitable terms offered would have appealed irresistibly to the judgment, of the people of New Zealand—and especially to the female electors — and that an overwhelming majority would have been given to prohibition. Instead of that there is only a majority of a little over twelve thousand, with the sailors', absent voters', and soldiers' votes yet to be counted. How they will go is problematical. The absentee votes, numbering, it is said, between'teri and fifteen thousand, may be cast in a way similar to the general average for the Dominion, giving prohibition a majority of 2J per cent., but the sailors' vote may set off this. There is left the soldiers' vote. If the return,of the first batch published this morning is indicative of the trend of the yoting of the balance, and eighty per cent, of the men register their votes, the prohibition vote will be converted into a continuance majority. But just now it is mere speculation to offer an opinion on the matter. One or two things emerge from the poll which provide food for reflection. The first is the acceptance for the first time of the principle of a bare majority in respect to the liquor question. It may be taken for granted that the precedent will not be departed from in the future. On this occasion the trade repudiated compensation, or, at any rate, compensation on the basis of the Efficiency Board's proposal. It will be difficult after this for the trade to convince the public in respect to any future poll that compensation is just or desirable. Its attitude, in fact, may, as one of the prohibition leaders has stated, act 1 as a boomerang. Another interesting feature was the heavy continuance vote in ChrSatchurch (a result due very largely, no doubt, to the strenuous advocacy of continuance by the local newspapers) and the equally heavy continuance vote in Wellington, the stronghold of liquor. On the other hand, hard-headed, canny Dunedin went solidly for prohibition, as did all the electorates surrounding Auckland. Taranaki's majority for prohibition was very solid, though Eginont showed a decrease. Taumarunui's increase, however, more than made up the leeway. Again the North Island declared strongly for prohibition, whilst the South Island, perhaps more conservative in these matters, displayed no inclination to disturb' the strongiy-entrenohed liquor tradp The final decision rests in the lap of the gods, or with the soldiery and if thirty
thousand exercise their votes in the same way as the five thousand at Some have done, then the difference in the final figures may be measured in hundreds. But the result, whichever way it goes, is unsatisfactory, as it will not, as was hoped, put an end to the liquor controversy that has overshadowed the politics of the country for so many years, and will not provide any real stability in respect to this vexed question.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19190412.2.27
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, 12 April 1919, Page 4
Word count
Tapeke kupu
503THE POLL. Taranaki Daily News, 12 April 1919, Page 4
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.