The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1909. THE TREND OF LOCAL OPTION.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2456, 22 March 1909, Page 4

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, MARCH 22, 1909. THE TREND OF LOCAL OPTION.

The Rev. Edward Walker, secretary of the N.Z. Alliance, whose statistics upon matters affecting the liquor trade have come to be regarded as of standard authority, lias been analysing the voting at the last local option polls. His figures show in a very striking way the progress that the prohibition sentiment has made in New Zealand during the past ten or twelve years. In 1896 the no-license votes over the whole of the Dominion represented only 37.82 per cent of the valid votes polled, but in 1908 they represented 53.45 per cent. The progress has been in a declining ratio, but so far it lias shown no sign of stopping. By 1899 the no-license votes had grown to 42.23 per cent, in 1902 they were 48,8 S per cent, in 1905 51.27 per cent, and in 1908, as we have just said, 53.45 per cent. These are the dominion figures. The provincial figures throw some curious sidelights on the movement. Taranaki, which gave 48,37 per cent of its votes to no-license in 1896, had raised the proportion to only 51.65 per cent in 1908. This is by far the smallest measure of progress recorded among the provinces. Auckland raised it* figures from 39.13 per cent to 56.21 per cent, Hawke’s Bay from 41.83 per cent to 49.20 per cent, Wellington from 38.33 per cent to 54.81 per cent, Nelson, Marlborough and Westland from 29.73 per cent to 46.99 per cent, Canterbury from 37.15 per cent, to 50.61 per cent, and Otago and Southland from 36.95 per cent to 55.84 per cent. Of the larger provinces, Canterbury, which is apt to regard itself as the centre of temperance reform, has made tli.e least satisfactory progress from the prohibitionists’ point of view. Between 1902 and 1905 the no-lieense votes in that province fell from 51.90 per cent to 48.02 per cent, and in 1908 were still 1.3 per cent below the figure of six years before. Neither Auckland nor Wellington has ever looked back, but in 1905, when there appeared to be a marked revulsion of feeling in Canterbury, the Otago and Southland proportion fell from 54.72 per cent to 54.42 per cent. The figures for the prohibited districts that have had any experience of no-license are not altogether encouraging to our prohibition friends. Clutha, of course, has remained firm in its first'decision, and Grey Lynn, after voting no-license by 63.35 per cent, has confirmed it by 71.23 per cent, but most of the other “dry” districts have betrayed some slackening in their zeal. Ashburton voted no-license by 62.05 per cent in 1902, but polled only 47.90 per cent for non-restoration in 1905 and only 46.07 per cent in 1908. Oainaru’s l objection Jo the public bars declined from 63 per cent in 1905 to- 59.20 per cent in 1908, and Invercargill’s from 67.67 per cent to 55.99 per cent. Mataura voted no-license by 60.91 per cent in 1902 and non-restoration by 59.38 per cent in 1905 and by 56.04 per cent in 1908. '.Bruce has been more constant. After voting no-license by 61.30 in 1902, it voted lion-restoration by 59.87 per cent in 1905, and confirmed non-restora-tion by 61.01 in 1908. Commenting upon the. facts the “Lyttelton Times’■ •says:—

'These figures seem to suggest that when no-license is put on its tidal it loses friends for a time and crelites ,a more or less insistent demand tor the re-opening of the bars. In Ashburton the change of feeling is so remarkable that it can be explained only, by some special circumstances. The majority of the electors, however, are still expressing their confidence in tlie experiment, and even if the no-license figures should grow in the future mo faster than they grew between 1905 and 1908 by the local option poll -of 1914 we shall be standing on the very verge of .dominion prohibition" The electors should consider very seriously during -the ■ A / 'A —AM

next two • years whether this is the goal they wish to reach.

A very potent factor which our .contemporary seems to have overlooked in connection with the vote-in no-license districts is that prohibition enthusiasts are not likely to be nearly so keen to got all their adherents to the poll when they recognise how., thoroughly safe is their ■ position, owing to the three-fifblis majority being necessary to restore licenses. In regard to the future, the “Lyttelton limes” evidently does not consider there is any prospect of fresh licensing legislation being enacted, for a Dominion vote on a bare majority, as now asked, for by the NoLicense party would setile the question long before 1914.