From ‘The Objections to State Control’, The Spectator, 17 April 1915:
As our readers know, we hate State ownership of industries, because in our opinion it is inefficient, and tends to low product; but in this particular case we cannot be expected to regard this as a disadvantage. The “Government stroke” in the matter of selling beer and other light intoxicants will suit us exactly. A witty Frenchman declared that it was the ideal of every State functionary to get at the top of a narrow passage and shout out : “On ne passe pas!” We should not break our hearts if that were to be the attitude adopted in front of the beer-barrel. Another and more serious objection is that which is threatened by the most advanced section of the Temperance Party. Hitherto they have taken up the line that it would not he safe to make the sale of liquor a State monopoly, because there would be too great a temptation to State financiers to raise money by the sale of intoxicants. In other words, they dread the State being exposed to the temptation of making money by pressing the sale of liquors. We can quite well appreciate the strength of this argument, though we have always thought the high taxation already derived from liquor robs it very largely of its force. Be that as it may, we cannot help thinking that that section of the Temperance Party which holds these views will on consideration see that they do not apply to the present case. If we can at once get rid of the public sale of spirits and greatly reduce the alcohol standard in beer, we shall have made it far easier for the Temperance people to convert the nation, if they can, to total abstinence.
Comments