NOT long ago two simple Scottish electors, having been deluged by leaflets either advocating or denouncing Prohibition in view of the Local Option poll expected next November, and having heard much talk and many arguments in and out and round about the Temperance (Scotland) Act, 1913, took the extreme and, as it would now almost appear, the unusual step of expending 2d. in the purchase of a copy of the Aot, and reading it over for themselves. To their amazement they found that it had nothing whatever to do with Prohibition, and that, so far from those who framed it having apparently so extreme a step in view, it seems to have been drawn up with caution that has long been associated with our national character.

the

I think it is G. K. Chesterton who, in order to prove how our senses may deceive us under the influence of a preconceived idea, once wrote a fantastic tale of an old gentleman who was murdered on the top flat of some London mansions. The murder, it was proved by circumstantial evidence, must have been committed and the body removed within a few minutes of midday, and the case was the more puzzling because the porter and several other persons

swore stoutly that they had watched the door of the flats during the whole of the time in question, and that no human being had gone in or out. After a long period of bewilderment, the mystery was solved by some clever amateur who came to the assistance of the law and discovered that the deed had been done by the postman. This supposedly harmless official had called at the usual hour, and, contrary to all precedent, had taken away the body of the old gentleman with the mails in his post-bag. So little, however, had the witnesses associated the thought of murder with a postman, and so sure had they unconsciously been that a post-bag could contain nothing more mysterious than letters and newspapers, that they had not even seen the postman in in this new and unexpected character.

Exactly the contrary seems to have happened in connection with this Temperance Act. So sure has the public been that it contains Prohibition, that the shadowy form of this gigantio spectre has been seen flitting in and out of pages where assuredly it is not.

The other alternative one dismisses hastily. It cannot be that people write leaflets and make speeches about Aots which they have not read!

Experts here and there have, doubtless, put the facts plainly, but these faots seem, for the most part, to have fallen on unheeding ears. Let us, then, rid our minds of all preconceived ideas, and see what the Aot really contains.

Words and names are often so loosely applied as to befog the imagination, and a definition may clear the air.

Prohibition, as demonstrated across the Atlantic, means that the manufacture, sale, importation, or distribution of alcoholio drink is entirely forbidden. The wealthy classes may still be able to have wine on their tables from cellars stooked under the old system, but no one, from end to end of the United States, can now buy a single glass of spirits without putting himself into opposition to the law.

Under the "No License Resolution" of the Seottish Aet, on the other hand, the wholesale trade in liquor is allowed to go on pretty much as it did before, and hotels, inns, and clubs will still be allowed to sell alcoholic liquors to their guests, or to any one taking a meal on their premises. With a doctor's order liquor may be bought at a chemist's; restaurants may provide spirits, wine, or ale with meals, and the well-todo person need not be under any apprehension that his cellar will be interfered with; for, providing that he buys not less than two gallons at a time, his liberty to drink may even degenerate into license, without any interference from the

Aot. If, then, the No-License Resolution is not Prohibition, what is it, and why has it been the Nemesis of the "Trade" and the hope of the Temperance Party for the last seven years? On what, exactly, are we asked to vete in November?

We are to have three options put before us. (Here are the exaet words of the ballot paper.)

1. No Change Resolution.

(Means that the powers and discretion of the licensing court shall remain unchanged.) 2. Limiting Resolution,

(Means that the number of certificates for the sale of excisable liquors shall be reduced by one quarter in accordance with the provisions of the Act.)

3. No-License Resolution.

(Means that no certificate for the sale of exoisable liquors shall be granted except for inns, hotels, or restaurants, in special cases, in accordanee with the provisions of the Aot.)

With the first two options we are not here concerned, but as to the third, half the story of the meaning of the Resolution depends on the little word "except," and the exceptions above mentioned seem to the writer to clear our post-bag from any suspicion of containing the body of that much-murdered old gentleman, "Prohibition."

And now for the more particular meaning of

the

No License Resolution, If, by a majority of 55 per cent of the recorded votes (net less than 35 per cent of the electors for the area having voted in favour thereof) the Resolution is earried in any area, the grocers' license and the drinking bar go out of existence. The cause of Temperance reaps the enormous benefit that this entails, for the serious temptations to seeret drinking offered by the one, and the scandals of the streets so largely caused by the other, are immediately swept away.

This is not all, however. The licensing authorities, and, be it noted, the same licensing authorities as we have at present, may in any area issue fresh licenses for inns or restaurants, where, as in the Carlisle experiment, any one may have beer, wine, or spirits with his meals. It is true that the promises of such a publie-house or restaurant must be struoturally adapted to the provision of food; but the almost sure result of the passing of the No License Resolution would be that a certain number of the public-houses would, in their own interests, alter their premises so as to meet the demands of the Aot, and that these public-houses would go on with their business under a new and reformed system in May 1921, when the Resolution will come into force. Things would indeed work

out very much as they did in the Carlisle area experiment; and the "Trade," which, in many instances, seems sincerely desirous of doing its work in a better atmosphere, would be given the opportunity of fulfilling the aspirations which many of its members have recently expressed in regard to reform.

And here an interesting peint may be noted. After the expiration of the first year of the new restaurant license, the proprietor of what we may call the Reformed Public-house must satisfy the licensing authorities, through the figures shown by the excise, that he has not made more than two-fifths of his profits from the sale of alcoholic liquors. This provision, which seems to have been somewhat overlooked so far, should work out, it seems to us, in such a way as to make the limitatien most felt precisely where it is most needed. It surely means that where the inn, hotel, or restaurant makes large profits through the provision of lodgings, food, &c., this enactment will be little felt; while in the lower districts of great cities for instance, where the whole profit must be made on those very meals with which "drink" is provided, there will be very real restriction. If any one wants beer or spirits with his meal, he may have it; but, on the other hand, if he only wants

It must be admitted that the No-License Resolution is far from perfect. It goes too far for some of us, and not far enough for others. It is not free from a suspicion of olass legislation, although on this head it may be noted that the Independent Labour Party has recently, by a majority, voted in its favour. It removes drinking-bars and grocers' licenses without compensation, and it is so hedged about with "buts” and “ex

cepts" that that it practically leaves the situation in the hands of the licensing authorities a body that has not always been so wholeheartedly in favour of Temperance as some of us would desire.

With all its faults, however, it is the only measure of temperance reform now before the country. An interesting article, which appeared in the November number of 'Maga,' advocated State Purchase as an amendment to the 1913 Act. Sootland did not, however, rise to this idea, and although it is being discussed for England, there is no suggestion of its being offered to us Soots at present. Neither does the country appear to be ripe for Prohibition. Whatever might have been the case in the early days of the war, it seems certain that Scotland is not now inclined to follow America's example. Rightly or wrongly, she does not wish to go "dry." Half

than no bread, and the objections before mentioned are not, after all, insuperable. Since the Aet gives the whole matter into the hands of the electorate, the working man will not vote for "No-License" unless he likes it. As a matter of fact, when in 1887 a plebisoite of the city of Edinburgh was taken on the subject of Prohibition, the largest number of votes for the closing of the public-house was recorded in the poorest part of the oity, and the smallest in the West End, where the miseries connected with the present system were known only to the imagination. As to the hardship entailed by the publican. and licensed grocer, they, after all, have had seven years of warning and of plenty in which to insure against loss; the licensed grocer, moreover, loses only part of his trade, and the publican may reconstruct his premises and turn restaurant-keeper. To add to this, the whole thing is in the nature of an experiment, and need only last for three years, a reflection which should make an appeal to the canny Soot; while, as a guide to possibilities, it is interesting to remember that Ontario tried the same experiment many years ago, and that when, after three and a half years, she had an oppertunity of going back to the old conditions, the demands for Repeal were almost negligible.

If, then, the Aot is a real