The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. SATURDAY, AUGUST 22, 1908. DR. COLLINS ON NO-LICENSE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2276, 22 August 1908, Page 2

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. SATURDAY, AUGUST 22, 1908. DR. COLLINS ON NO-LICENSE.

Just when the community is showing a pronounced interest in the issue that is to come before the people in November next with regard to- the liquor trade, Dr. Collins comes boldly forward with what lie describes as “A Critical Essay” on the NoLicense question. None but a courageous man would thus venture into the turmoil of jealousies end prejudices wliicli,. surround Ibis issue at the present time, but- Dr. Collins is one of those few individuals who not only form original ideas but have the courage to give fearless expression thereto. Moreover, the doctor is invariably interesting, and whether one agrees with his conclusions or not there is no denying that the essay in question comprises a valuable contribution to a matter that is strongly agitating tho public at the present time. There are, of course, imperfections, some of which wo will proceed to direct attention to, hut there are so many able, thoughts embodied in the pamphlet that we can unhesitatingly commend its perusal by all who desire to consider the subject of No-License from a critical, unbiassed standpoint. In its presentation we fear the author has departed somewhat from tho simpler forms of expression which are necessary to bring his views easily before the average reader, and in many cases -one not trained in tho -arts of literature and logic is more likely to he mystified than enlightened. Another fault more serious is that the writer makes many very pronounced statements without adducing a tittle of evidence in support thereof. Tims on page 7 lie states: “Economists agree that prohibition has failed an its endeavor to allay this evil,” and on page 10: “Does No-License imply such economic advantage as warrants its adoption? Economists say ‘No.’”

Now these .are exceedingly dcbatablo points and tho writer might reasonably have hoen expected to quoto some facts to substantiate an assertion that is bound to ho challenged by No-License advocates. Dr. Collins agrees that “the present facilities for misdirected consumption arc elhiculy and morally wrong,” but is by no mounts satisfied that tho romody is to bo found in No-Liconso. As a matter of fact, practically the wholo of his pamphlot constitutes an attack upon tho principles underlying the movement which has becomo so popular in this country. In this lie strikes fearlessly and ably at what ho considors to ho erroneous conceptions of tho subject. His chapter dealing with tho ecclesiastical aspect is original in its thesis, and is powerfully written. His finding in this connection is that, assuming the church considers tho present system ethically and morally wrong, tho natural sequence should bo:

“A united co-operation to its disuse, by moral and Christian-like teaching and example, while to legislators is left such measures us will render consumption legitimate within ceitain bounds, such as aro consistent with Iho economic progress and nation il vigor of this country.” Tho writer emphatically objects to the prominent part taken, by tho church in the No-Liconso movement, deploring what ho terms Otlio submorgonco of Christ-liko humility in tho struggle for tomperanco supremacy.” In tho chapter headed “political,” he treats upon tho oconomic.il effect of No-License on the community, and incidentally brings up the old question of the relation of poverty to drunkenness. In this case cause and ’ effect may easily become confused. Dr. Collins chooses to bclievo that tlie amount of poverty and crime duo to tho abuso of alcohol is not nearly so great as wo havo boon informed. Dealing with this point from a national standpoint, ho contends thus:

National progress dopends directly on increase of population, intensive production and equality of adjustment between land, capital, and wages, in which alcohol can play no part either directly or indirectly.

From our view point the doctor bases his conclusions here on false promises. Our own observation leads its unhesitatingly to the conclusion that excessive indulgence in alcohol precedes poverty, with accompanying crime and: immorality, and the fact is constantly being testified to by Judges and- Magistrates entrusted with the jurisdiction over criminals. The connection between drunkonness and crime is much too definite to he ignored either from the individual or communal standpoint, and no amount of specious argument can alter the fact. Moreover, in contending that alcohol can play no part in tlie progress of a country, Dr. Collins has surely become lost in tho mazes of doubtful logic. No matter what tho population, production or distribution in New Zealand might be, if alcohol is consumed to such an extent as to impair tho energies of tliß people and divert their revenue from other channels the effect must obviously be detrimental to national progress. In dealing with the effect of No-Licenso in a community the writer makes tho following statement:

Therefore, to affirm Borough A under Restrictive Legislation had 146 cases of drunkenness in a year as against 113 during prohibitive limited enactment or No-License is the direct admission of occasional evil tending to become habitual unless you admit 146 cases originally quoted as arising from illicit trade, whereas the later 113 are the distinct evidence of this evil, which wore not by any means so intensive undor Restrictive Legislation. In this case the doctor is surely wrong, for he apparently ignores tho legal trade carried on under NoLiconso whereby beer by the barrels can be openly purchased, which doubtless leads to a large proportion of the drunkenness which obtains in No-License districts. After pointing out very properly the danger to tho community of having so controversial a question giving rise to individual and communal hostility, the writer proceeds to indicate a solution in tho direction of more restrictive regulation than, exists at present. Two clauses in this connection may he quoted: (a) To convert the public-houses into a decent place of public refresh ment, with no drinking bars, no hidden places for drinking, no private entrances, but fitted with seats and tables, whero eatables and non-intoxicating drinks would bq served as readily as alcoholic drinks. (b) Order and decency to be pre'■served in public houses; no intoxicating drink to he served to .any notified' drunkard, and tho publican to be punishable for any person leaving -liis premises drunk. We have quoted sufficiently to indicate that the pamphlet produced by Dr. Collins .is one worthy of careful thought, and touches upon a topic 01. vital interest at tho present time.