The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-11-05
WILL PRESS
FOR The BILL
Continued from Page One.)

Continued from Page One.)
now in the Territory. q law greatly
| superior 10 the one it supplanted. -
/ Antlsaloon Statement.
| After the meeting of the Anti-Saloon
League members yesterday afternoon,
/ the following statement was sent TO
| The Advertiser:
| The statement of Hon. ". R. Castle,
which we understand is to be communi-
! Gated to The Avertiser. establishes the
| fact that the Anti-Saloon League has
NOT entered into any agreement of any
! kind with the liquor interest of the
Territory. Ever since the beginning
| of the year the league has known of
! attempts to increase the area of pro-
; hibition, made by reform interests on
, the mainland entirely disconnected with
! any local organization. These attempts
/ have aimed TO include all the Territories
of the United States under prohibitory
| laws. Our league has been in hearty
| sympathy with this program and when
| it was informed that Senator johnson
| of North Dakota had introduced a bill
| to prohibit the liquor traffic in Hawaii,
| it determined to bring all the support
| possible to this proposed law. In fur
| therance of this determination the local
| Anti-Saloon League sent Mr.. WOoley
to the mainland, and it proposes to fight
| the battle to the end.
Mr.. Castle Makes Statement.
The fact that the name of w. R.
| Castle figured prominently in what The
| Advertiser regarded as an agreement
| binding on the temperance workers of
| Hawaii induced a request from The
| Advertiser to Mr.. Castle to make a
| statement in the matter. What M.
! Castle says follows:
"About March % last. Mr.. Cohen,
member for Honolulu, came into my Of
| fee and said that he wanted to talk
over the liquor situation with me, as
! he knew that | was connected with the
| Civic Federation, Anti-Saloon League,
and perhaps other concerns. He said
! that the stand he had taken in the mat
ter with the iqour sellers had excited
great deal of bitter feeling on their
| part; he was not himself liquor dealer,
| but represented the Wine Grower s AS
| ISOLATION of California iii | correctly
| recollect his statement). He stated
that he thought the proposed law was
intended to remedy defects in the pres
ent law of the Territory, but that as
there was pretty strong opposition ex-
cited by the proposition, and some steps
! appeared to be taken toward getting
| the congress of the United States to
prohibit the sale of liquor in this Ter
ritory, he wished that some understand
| ing could be arrived at between the
| different interests in the Territory to
| let things alone.
90 | replied, the Moore liquor bill was a
surprise, because it was pretty general
| ly understood at the last election that
nothing would be done at this session
to alter the present liquor law, but that
| it should go on at least two years
| longer and have a thorough trial. and,
if it required amendment, amendments
could better be made after three or four
years than after one or two. / recalled
| to Mr.. Cohen s attention the fact that
| Senator Quinn, who was nominated by
| the Republicans, had taken the pledge
! to support the platform, and that now
has was going back on his pledge and
| it seemed to me that the liquor inter
ests were utterly regardless of any
agreements that had been made in the
matter. [ have an impression that l
also said that I thought the time had
not vet arrived for Washington to in
| terfere in our matters.
After some further talk, said that
| | was not authorized to represent any
association or body, but would go out
at once and interview what persons J.
| could find who might be supposed to
| have some authority to speak on the
| subject, and would let him know the re-
| sult-that afternoon, if possible. Mr..
| Cohen seemed satisfied with this propO-
| sition, and | went out Immediately fol
| lowing his departure, and met and con-
| versed with quite number of repre-
sentative people who are identified with
| the temperance cause, but without re-
gard to whether they were Anti-Saloon
| League people or otherwise. ] did not
| finish this interviewing until quite late
| in the afternoon, and did not see Cohen
again. But late in the evening he tele-
| phoned to me, and / replied that [ had
| interviewed a number of people and
| they seemed to feel that if the liquor
people would drop all attempt to inter
| fere with the present laws and would
| join with the community in carrying
them out faithfully, it would be per
| fectly fair for the temperance people
| to take the same stand and not push
prohibition, either here or in Washing
ton-at least prior to the next session
of the legislature. This seemed to sat
isfy him; but, feeling that it was very
important that this thing should be re
| duced to writing, so that there could be
no chance of misunderstanding. | wrote
note to Mr.. Cohen the following morn
ing, as follows:
The Letter in the Case.
Honolulu, March "a, 1909.
! Hon. J. C. Cohen, Member for Homo
lulu, House of Representatives
"Dear Sir:-In the discussion of i'm
portant matters, where sharp lines of
conflicting interests clash, it is so easy