[Every letter must he accompanied by the name md address of the writer, not necessarily foi publication, but as a guarantee of good faith, i Rejected letters cannot be returned under any circumstances whatever. Correspondents are advised to keep copies of their letters, as this rule will be adhered to strictly.] TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—The question "Does Prohibition pro hibit?" is at the present time exercising the public mind throughout New Zealand. I en close a copy of the 'Boston Evem'ng Tran script, 1 dated October 5, 1895, wherein the editor of that journal, dealing with the much vexed question in its relation to *he State of Maine, the oldest, I think, prohibitory State in America, writes thus ; Still the fact will remain, in -pite of all the impressive solemnity of our correspondent, that hundreds, if not thousands, of the people who annually visit Maine are ready to testify that the enforcement of the prohibitory law in the cities and large towns of that State is a screaming farce, played to hoodwink the people. As unim peachable eviden e of this fact, we reproduce the statement of the Rev. A. 11. Wright, pastor of the St. Lawrence street Congregational Church, Port land, made in a sermon last Sunday: "The con dition of things here is simply amazing to all honest, unprejudiced, and right-minded citizens. Liquor-selling is a crime in this State in the eves of the civil law ; liquor-sellers arc criminals. Yet here in our Christian City, governed by Christian men, we are told that not iess than 3(K) places are open and in full operation for the sale of in toxicant:'." The people who deny these things evidently do it in a lit of intellectual desperation. The facts are against them, and they have no other recourse. We would inform our correspondent that Roose velt's reputation as an enforcer of law could only be damaged by connecting it with the shameless way in which Maine officials allow the pro hibitory law to be both see:etlv and openly vio lated. 