GREAT PROHIBITION GATHERING.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3383, 25 November 1911, Page 7

GREAT PROHIBITION GATHERING.

REV. R. S. CRAY AT CHRISTCHURCH. WHAT HE SAW IN HIS TRAVELS. The Rev. R. S. Gray addressed a wenattended meeting at the King’s Theatre on “Prohibition in America.” The chair was occupied by the Rev. S. Henderson. - . ~ The chairman said it was one oi tne objects of the meeting to extend a hearty welcome home to the Rev. R. SGray. Mr Gray was a valued leader of the Prohibition party. He belonged to New Zealand as a whole. . - He had visited America to gain first-hand: information on matters of great interest to New Zealanders, and had gained experience which would be of great value in the coming campaign. (Applause.) The Rev. Mr Gray proceeded to deal with the fact that in America, although 40,000,000 people were living under prohibitory law, the liquor bill was still increasing. . . . There was no really efficient prohibition in America. Maine and Kansas had constitutional prohibition, and other States had “State-wide’’ prohibition, but the inter-Stato Commerce Law prevented the prohibition of importations of liquor into “dry” territory. The “sealed package” law, which protected all posted parcels in the same way as private letters were protected in this country, ensured that there could be no examination of anysealed parcel of liquor posted into a No-license area. Until the Inter-State Commerce Law was amended there could never be real prohibition in America. Even then, where one State was “dry” and an adjoining one “wet”, it was impossible to patrol the whole of the boundary line—a line _ which was often merely an imaginary line. The Rev. Mr Gray then proceeded! to describe some shades of “prohibition” in American States. And coming to fhe dispensary system, he said: The “dispensary system” in America did not prevent sly grog-selling. Sly grog-sell-ing was rampant in cities where the dispensary system was in vogue. The system' led men to buy liquor in large quantities, and to get beastly drunk. Mr Savannal, the Chief of Police, found it impossible to get convictions against breakers of the prohibitory law, because all the recent people in the town had purchased exemption from jury service, and in a city of 75.000 or 80,000 inhabitants only about 500 were liable for service. This remainder included all the drunkards and sly grog-sellers in the commnnitv. ... In Tennessee,

in a town of about 700 inhabitants, all the saloons were wide open, although State-wide prohibition was supposed to be in force. Convictions could not be obtained, as no jury would convict. In regard to Alaine, there was not much now to be said on the subject. . . It was true that in Alaine last year 657 Federal liquor license taxes were paid, but 460 licenses were held by druggists, who had to pay a fee; 200 were held by persons who sold medicinal preparations containing alcohol. while seventeen were held, by persons using alcohol for medicinal or mechanical purposes. A sly grog-seller took out a license, and was allowed to do so even in a “dry” State, because lie had no desire to fall foul of the Federal authorities. —Extracted from “Lvttelton Times,” October 17, 1911.

The Rev. Air Gray has, in the foregoing extracts, stated l exactly what the Anti-Prohibition party in New Zealand has been saving in the newspapers’ for some weeks past, and licensed victuallers ought to be thankful for the Rev. Gray’s thorough exposure of those miserable methods the prohibitionists of New Zealand would like to foist upon this country in the names of righteousness and religion ! Nearly half the people in America, Air Gray say 6. are living under prohibition, and the drink hill is increasing. It has more than doubled. Then prohibition is a farce. Tlie story about “sealed packages,” and the posting of liquor into prohibited areas, shows that the better-class of people in No-license States can get all they want of good liquor, whereas the working man in the No-license area must put up with any rubbish he can get on the spot. Prohibition. Air Gray demonstrates, is “class” legislation. AY# like to hear AH Gray talk of the line between “dry” and “wet” States, and the cost of patrolling that line to prevent smuggling. Will our readers try and imagine the cost of patrolling arid policing the coast and inaceessnne back-block territory of this country if prohibition is adopted in New Zealand ? Air G ray also dealt with various shades of prohibition, and he found “sly grogselling rampant in cities where the dispensary system was in vogue,” and imagine the prohibitory law being held m such contempt tlxat against the sly grog-sellers no conviction could he \»~- tained, the respectable people contracting themselves out of the jury service, Sly grog-sellers were tried by their “peers,” and no such jury would convict.

Mr Gray had little to say about Maine, but what he did say showed that Maine had fully half as many Federal licensed grog-sellers—who were also tire sly grog-selling gentry in Maine —as we have, licensed victuallers in New Zealand and they fought on the side of the prohibitionists for the retention of the prohibitory law. Air Gray is a valued leader of the Prohibition party in this country, and he conies hack to New Zealand to induce the people of this Dominion to accept prohibition, which he shows to be a failure in America. His own words are; ‘"lnhere is really no efficient prohibition in America.”- Nothing more need be said: Mr Gray lias reached the limit. However, in view of all that the Rev. Mr Gray has said, moderate men and women in this country, who are temperate in 'their use of alcoholic beverages, will surely decide on election- day to vote for the continuance of the present system of licensing rather than vote for a method that lias proved inefficient in America, and is accompanied by such a deplorable condition of local and State Government as to be a disgrace to civilised and respectable people.***