ee ee nee

~

re

— se OO ED Se

EXAMINER.

————S—

THE DAILY

~ FANUARY 5, 1891. The Scott Act Campaign.

will have been reached on Thanks to Tue ExaMINER

THe crisis

Thursday next. there has been a free and fair—not & sided—discussion of the main points in the

issue. Let us now sum Up.

The principles by which the electors |

wught to be guided are well stated in the of Archbishop Ireland.

ug stores

admirable lettez Confine the liquor traffic to the dr le ; if not possible, have the mos!

if possib : Don't

restrictive law that can be enforced. scruple about the passage of a license ong to license an alcoholic

law

on the plea that it is wr evil, for the sale and use of stimulants ia not an evil per se, though it is undoubtedly true that the most g! ; evils of the age result from their sale and The duty and object of the State is to check the and effective measure to that end may rightly, anc morally, and properly be empleyed. Be notion that the com-

gantic

abuse.

abuse, any

not deceived, the at the munity can rid itself of responsibility in re- spect to the abuses of the liquor traflic by Scott Act is a fond and

simply voting for the fon Responsibility for

foolish and baseless one. the enforcement of the law lies upon the community. If the liquor traflic continues unchecked by a prohibitory law, then surely the hands of the community are nol clear of the price of blood.” A law unenforced does harm.

Remembring these principles, let us re view briefly the points brought out in the discussion.

(1.) Has the Scott Act been en furced? The Guardian, the Rev. Fred. E. J. Lioyd, Father McElmeeil, the Rev. James Simpson — have all said, No. The statistics brought forward by Tue Examiner, and the Rev. James Car- ruthers, alike say, No. The latter gentle- man has shown that under the licease = sys- tem accompanied by a temperance Move ment there were fewer arrests for drunk- eness than under the Scott Act accurmpan- ied by a temperance stagnation. THE Examiner has proved that there were, propoitionably to population, fewer arrests for drunkenness in the(license)city of Hal: fax than in the (Scott Act) city of Charlotte- town. THe Examiner has also produced official statistics which show that the pro- porticn of convictions «fur, drunkenness is larger in Prince Edward Island than in either Nova Scotia, Quebec, or British Columbia. Oa the other hard, the Guard- ian came out as a daily for the special pur- pose, as it seems, of showing that *'s

ae when issued weekly were alse ;

4 the Rev. James Carruthers }«3 ques- tioned the aulichilvy ul cde cial figures. It is the duty of electors—the jury, to ren- der a verdict on Thursday next,—to weigh well the evidence pro and con. For The EXAMINER we have no hesitation in saying that the facts which are known, justify the statement that, under the Scott Act, all who wanted to sell have sold, and all who wanted to drink have drunken ; that sev- eral valuable lives have been lost to the community by reason of the non-enforce- ment of the law, and that hundreds otf fam- ilies have suffered loss and misery.

(2). Then, if the law has not been en-

forced, what is now the duty of the com- munity? What would be done if our cus- toms laws were being violated as the Scott Act is violated—-if hundreds of merchants were engaged in smuggling, and if witnesses brought before the courts were guilty, every day, of perjury? Certainly the law would be enforced, or other means would be taken to collect the revenue. So, we should either have the Scott Act enforced or get rid of it. The means for its enforce- ment in the past have been insufficient. What other means are to be adopted for the future ? What response has been made to the repeated questions of Tue ExaMINER, asked within the past month? Is the ex- ample of the W. C. T. U. to be followed by the men? Arewe to have a Law and Order League? Do we hear anything about the establishment of a Civic Reform League? Has a single step been taken towards the establishment of temperance coffee rooms and other means of attracting the nascent customers of our beer gardens, whiskey shebeens and gambling dens? Is there any prospect of a temperance movement similar to that which pre- vailed when Father McGillivary and the Reverend George W. Hodgson were in the Church militant? There is no answer to any of these ques- tions. Our Scott Act promoters have been tov busily engsged in trying to prove that the Guardian and the Rev. Fred. E. J. L'oyd and others were wrong when they described the strength of the liquor inter- est in Charlottetown and the prevalence of the drinking habit, to pay much attention to questions asked by Tax Examiner. We are, therefore, compelled to the conclusion that the enforcement of the Scott Act will be vo better in the future than it has been in the past ; compelled to the other alier- nitive—compelied to say that we ought to get rid of the Scott Act, which we cannot or will not enforce, and try something else,

3. Buc, what else ? There's the rub. As to High License or Low License we may say this : it would be infinitely better to

have drinking and drunkenness under a yaa ,

one- |

THE DAILY EXAMINER. - -.0° 0 * 2 3

' then it is to have drinking and drunkenness under a law which prohibits the sale of in- | toxicants ; moreover, it is more likely that a license law which everyone will say is

not coo stringent will be enforced than the the people mia-

Scott Act which five-sixths of say by their votes, and a very large jority say by their acts, is too atringent.

4. But we have no license law. Why ¢ |The Hon. Daniel Davies, in his letter to | the Patriot of Saturday evening, Says :

“ Certainly it was the duty of the Hon, Neil McLeod and his colleagues, if they thought it necessary, to have had such a law

piaced on the Statute Book as would have ‘+stepped in” in the event of the Scott Act not being sustaine I, to have done so.

Perhaps the Hon. gentleman is not aware that a bill providing a license law was, on the suggestion of Tue ExaMINER, submit- ted the Legislature several years ago. The bill was supported by the Government party. It was also, at the beginning, sup- ported by the flon. John Yeo and other members of the Opposition. If it had passed and been sustained by the courts, the liquor dealers would, on the revocation of the Scott Act, hava been in a position similar to that expressed by the words ‘ out of the fat, into the fire.” But those who shout for the Scott Act, those who ac- cept the Scott Act as crystallized temper- ance, raised a cry against the ‘ licensing of an evil,” stirred up the public opinion of the country against the bill, made as much party capital as they could out of it ; and, finally, it was thrown out of the Council.

5. The fate of that reasonable and pro- per measure causes THE EXAMINER to doubt the passage of a license law in the

event of the defeat of the Scott Act. The ivufluences which were then brought to bear against license,

will be brought to bear again. The public opinion of the country is still firmly set against a license law. The members of the Legislature are still representatives of their vwn constituents rather than of Charlotte- town. The Legislature is still divided. It will be represented that the Scott Act may again be brought into operation in Char- lotteto wn at the expiration of three years, and that as an object lesson, three years of free rum will be better than four or five months. Reasons sufficient to silence the consciences of members concerning their

short, a license bill wiil in our opinion, as befure, be lust. This conclusion is borne out by the responses of Legislative Coun- cillors to the unheard of request of the editor of the Guardian, and by the faet that constituents of two of the honorable gen- tleman who declined to com's themselves hs. e, da vie strengt.: of public opinion, had the sublime impertinence to address to

these gentlemen a letter of censure. Having arrived at this conclusion, Tre

EXAMINER has not deemed it worth while to discuss the question § of Scott Act vs. License. Nor can we, in view of the doubt and uncertainty which exists—the deubt about ‘* leeal option,” the uncertainty that any measure can be passed bythe local Legislature, which will not be ‘thung up”’ in the courts —advise the electors to vote one way or the other, as we certainly should advise them if the doubt and uncertainty were removed. We can only regret that the promoters of the petition did not choose their time a little more discreetly—dii not wait until the question of local option had been decided and the true temperance sentiment of the town been more fully ripened. It is impossible that the result of the poll on Thursday next can be satis- factory. Ifa majority vote for the Act, we shall have to endure another full three years’ term of Scott Act viclated ; if a ma- jority vote against the Act, we shall prub-

ably have « term of ‘‘free rum.” So, after the manner of the clergymen, we can only ask electors to consider well for themselves the facts and questions here set out, and vote according to the dictates of their con- sciences.

An Insufficient Excuse.

In the course of his last speech in Market Hail, Mr. L. H. Davies, M. P., cffered some excuses for the United States in re- spect to their abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. One of these excuses was recently treated of by Mr. Bourinot, the ac- complished constitutional historian, when addressing the American Historical As- sociation in session at Washington. We quote :—

“The causes which led to the repeal of the treaty were mainly the desire to punish Can- adians for their sympathy with the Confederate States—a sympathy entirely exayverated —and to force the provinces in o annexation or such a measure of trade as would better suit Ameri- can interests. A biil was actually intreduced in the House of Representatives providing for the admission of these countries into the federal union—a mere political straw, it is true, but still showing the current of opinion in some quarters in those days.” The Canadian authorities had had nv knowledge cf the &t. Alban’s raid, but the moment they found that desperate men were ready to vivlate the neutrality of their territory they took prompt measures to prevent the continuation of such anlawful acts, and even piid a large sum of money in acknowledgment of their supposed responsibility when a Montreal magistrate ordered some of the stolen money to be re- turned to the ro»bers on their release. Both Mr. Secretary Seward and Mr. Caleb Cushing, in published documents, ackhowledged the energy and sincerity with which the Canadian authoritie:, throughout this trying period, diecharged their responsibilities Mr. Seward wro’e that ‘‘the Presdent regards with sincere satisfaction the conduct and proceed- ings of the Canadian authorities.” It was well also to remember how many Canadians

remissneas of duty will be advanced. In:

“_

te OE GLA IE AD ~ . Sapeaneen ae

oe a eT

189).

MONDAY, JANUARY 5

venture to bring up this old grievance against Canada,”

These ave undoubtediy the facts of the cise, It was, we feel sure, a surprise and a pain to the hundreds who were present in Market Hall when Mr. Davies epoke, to hear him as the apologist and advocate of |

FOR THE RED

vocate of citizens of the United States who were proved to be guilty of a violation of

Canadian laws and regulations.

The Scott Act Considered.

Before preaching the sermon yesterday morning in St. Peter’s Church, the Priest Incumbent, Rev. James Simpson, spoke as | follows to his congregation ;

I hope that during the week you will) pray earnestly to Almighty God that His Holy Spirit may guide aright thase who are to vote at the Scott Act election. The Eucharisc on Monday and Thursday will be offered with that intention And I would again remind you of your duty to vote as your consciences dictate, and warn you not to shirk your responsbility, for if the poll-

| | | |

ing is as close as it was last time much may depend upona few votes one way or the other. Whichever side you take avoid disputing and quarrelling, and give those who differ from you the credit of being at least as conscientious as yourself. It is im- possible for all men to see eye to eye in these matters, and therefore we should be

careful how we judge our neighbor or at- | tribute evil motives to him, and whatever | the result of the contest is, let us accept it |

gracefully —without triumph or anger—as | "B’o yote against the

‘wy ; For my own}

the ruling of the majority. part, after watchimg the working of the

Act here for the last four years—and I have | certainly had opportunities which many

laymen have not had, of being behind the

scenes and witnessing the effecta on those

who buy and those who sell—and after! ———— en ears = reading the arguments on both sides,—I |

have determined to vote for the repeal of!

the Act for the following reasuns :

1. I consider ‘the law (i) Un-English, | becanse it interferes with the rights of the subject. (ii) itis unfair, for it does not treat rich and poor alike—the rich man may import what liquors he pleases, while the poor man must go without. (tii) It is of 948 informations during 10 years, there! ~ Ce ee ee ae have been only 359 ceuratbenr aa about; The Placéthe Seott Act Holds. one-third--although I suppose everyone ; cone ae i summoned had real'y bri aa the law. . Sug, —In an editorial inthe Island Guar-! does no govd.

2. It does not prevent the sale of intoxi- | dian of the Sth of December I read the fol-land other testimony piaced before them canta, for the number of places where |'OW!MS: Lacking over the struggles f from every conceivable standpoint, they |. liquor is sold has steadily increased undor{ the last twelve years. the marvel is that the are echomy the hellow shout of these |, the Act. | Seott Act Bown such a place in the hearts| gen'lemen that the Scott Act is a tailure— '

3. It does not check intemperance, for °f the people to-day

are printed in red ink.

ar7T, aR,

53 ohn nee eS >

oe

Taye SS A ey 4

unworkable in this city as long as public

. . . ° » ‘ 7 5 ae sentiment is what it is at present, for out} Charlottetown, January 5, 1890 = — 7

miserable miscreants, and are trying to}

I propose to put the | that it it fails to prohibit. If these simple-|

so with the greatest ease; and I believe the | ‘ 13 ven 3 a percentage of drunkards is quite as large ‘been submitted to public opinion in 86) boat with all the rumselle:s, I am _per- here as in other towns. cities and ee ee a

4. It is conducive to perjury, to decep- land rejected in 19 at its first submission tion, to adulteration, to imuiorality. {In only two of these 19 districts has there! be a friend of temperance, pulling along in| |} 6. There is no prospect of the law, if. been any second submission, viz, St. John.) the samo boat with all the illicit ramsellers | t

iW ;

a mistake.

THE RE

make themselves believe that the Scutt Act ing, M+gi+rete Fitzgerald g-ve written judge Ignoring all the ¢etatietica ™eut in the cese against Dr. Baynes, m'*s pg tie sammons with cos's. | trate held thet the defendant being a italy custifiel medical practiticn r

| Act of

, : ee od . . . \ifinerancy unler the Act. those who want to drink to excess can do, Gardian ’ conclusions to the test of figures.] minded (/) people would for one momevt | siat if he were to hold Since the passage of the Scott Act, it has;-onsider that they are sailing in the same ,

. ™- It was adopted in 67) syaded they wou!d conclude they had made | they reside. Think of a mav, clamming to| one avd Tue Examiner regre's that

the United States, —as the apologist and ad- = ; 7 - . : es = ee . Laallond | ae, ; a Against the Act. XK —a Lede! : ‘ (This line is printed in red ink on the ballo ‘

3 : (This line is printed 1 ink on the ballot.) 4 “TI fname ie Cw = rad esr / S SS : —ae Mies © onal . — : For the Act. | eer . f ;

—* — i sa " ‘ — :, | a ! eott Act, place your X } re the words “ Against the Ae

he upper space, where the worcs “ Against tie Ae

— _—— Ss

Tur Baynes Case Dismissep. — this

a

th:

na 5

the @ y, ond registered underthe Metic be Province, could net le gutlty He intimate ‘therwice tle ‘ould be to hive the varioue members of

-edical profession in the lcuities im white The dec’sion is an ing

‘ill not admit of its being published #=-faly day. 3

sustained, better are N. B. where the adverse vote was in-/of Charlott-town helping at his oars! | than it has ee ‘or. pi: creased from 2 to 77, and Stanstead Co +| Imagine it, who can, th»t these samerum- the W. C. T. U. have ised to P. Q, where, on the second election, the sellers, Owimg te the enormeus quantives it, the ‘Temperance Committe; made Act was adopted, and on a third election | of Jiquors they have been selling in di fiance same promise last time, and signally failed | Fejected. This leaves 67 distrie@urhich at (of the law, bave become ail at once £6

Snaee ‘have been no elections in 1890) adopted the! evil work that they are now asking us to

I make this statement because I have Act, and gave ita trial—with what success? | abolish the Scott Act and give them a several times been asked my opinions. land Thirty-three of them have since revoked it, | license law that they may not be allowed to you have a perfect right to know what they ‘and it is now in force in only 32 counties} ruin ail the boys entirely! Do these men are upona subject of this sort. At the and 2 cities of Canada. | take the people of Charlottetown to be fouls? same time 1 have no desire to influence} In each of the 12 years between 1878 and | D,, they imagine that the electors are wait- your votes, for that is a matter which must | 1839, inclusive, there have been elections’ ing with listening eara to catch what they rest between God and your own conscience. j held, giving the people an opportunity of may say with regard to any temperance

to fulfil it when once the election was 8°me time between 1878 and 1889 (there|shocked at the terrible results of their own | —

Stoves, Sleighs and Robes,

AT 2 OCLOCK, P. M.

ARLOR, Dining Room, Bedroom Kitchen Furniture, Pictures, Carp

R. BEAIRSTO, >

jnd Aucticneer,

—————— expressing their opinions of the Act. Let law? Itrow not. The old adage comes to LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. oe ; ' In the six vears, 1878-1883, inc’usive, “When a got sick, the devil a saint Letter _D. : during which there were 37 contests wou Pg otter Frem men D. Ferguson there were cast for the Scott Act, | But when the devil got well, the devil a eaint To the Editor of the Patriot : VOCER. . sree ese sersescessoeerewese ane! was he. Sir,—I would be hard to please if 1 were Agalnat %. 0662 ccec e+ wens 2 225

enough to believe that the rumseller is really | a “saint” what has coused the sickness that has brought about his conversion and mae him such a strong advocate of ‘‘frue Temper- | ” i . i Well, hereis the secret: Our cons)

not satistied with the effect of my last letter. You started by trying to prove that the National Policy had discriminated against British trade and in favor of the Americans, while the policy of the McKen-

Majori‘y in favor of the Act in first BIX YORTS.....rceceescceercvecsenes In the six years. 1884 1889, inclusive, during which there were 89 contests, there were cast for the Scott Act,

18 009

ance. | sumption of liquors is far too smal! to please

— JUVENILE DANCING, I wis» to point out to those who are foolish Te second and last term of instruction ig

Sth, at 4 p. m.

Dancing and Deportment, at Terpsich all, will commence on THURSDAY, J

E, BURRIS. &

jand

dy t] dte

zie Government had produced a very large balance of British over American im- ports Finding however, that the very opposite of this is true, and that our trade, which was over twenty millions of dollars

Votes...... . ... 187 907 our friends the rumsellers. Odsatario, which is

ht CNN. 55 <n cetiabennttas Gl 5,401 be 4 gallens per head. We have a population |

Conservatives were ‘‘ wise” from 1868 to 1873 because they had a balance of §7,-

against that hated Scott Act even if they

cast for the Act were............- 122.943 selier (he weld lecense in the olden times) Beata Hh. 600 eee escsesee 134,9%4 admitted to the writer that he was not! -——— making eneugh now to pay the rent. 1} . 12.921 believe hiss utement. We can, therefore. ' a : : _ | readily uederstend the cause of the present Since its enactment in 1878, in those dis-' asta:k upon the Scott Act. We heera pre t tricts where it has been more than once dea: trom these people sbout the herriblene:s submitted to the peorie, the vetes for the of «ling 90,000 ga:lons—and ii is, no duubt, Act have fallen from 99.314 to 69.487 ; and 90009 giiicns tov mach—bat M; aditer, 1, the votes against the Act have increased W*!* to ack these people whe areZdec simi g | from 61.461 to 93.719, Since Ist Jsnuary, agains’ the Scott Act this q'ts0n ; lf e 1884, the Act has been voted on in 51/5! of 99 ~~ S) e i nloshuiic al wil ad “| districts, none of which had deen previ -nsly | “8° i f keu se and, mnorelity het «11 while 38 adopted it OF these 38 diatriets, Ranch tyes is wit Shea Guan st * fall 30 revoked it on the first opportunity, le» « Wie ' ti eo ed when that balance is reduced to onejing it now in oneraion in only 8 of thel . half? The truth is that so far Canada has j original 51 dis! ricts. not discriminated against any country.| To my mind these fiynres preve that the | That folly is yet in store for us when| more the panple saw of the Soot the less | Laurier and Cartwright get into power, if|they thought of it In h» lost four years they ever do. It is quite fallacious to con- '

1889 a balance the other way of $2,400,000 ayear. The Gritsmust have been quite crasy from 1875 to 1878 in producing a bal- ance of $5,000,000 a year against Britain, and clear stark mad in 1891 when they propose to place Customs taxes of $22,000,- 000 a year in favor of the United States which would compel us to buy almust everything from that country. »

Yu sty that the McKenzie Government did not Giscriminate against Great Britayn. xIthongh they had a balance of nearly $5.,- 000,000 a year of American over British imports. How then can you say that the present administration have so discriminat-

Majority of votes agairst the Act..

Nemo, Jan 2ud, i8?l.

A Question fer the “ Patriot.” |

Against Rigor: acces 182 506 Wholly under license, consumes 4 gallons per | 5 . jhead. Under license we would be no GREAT SA LE 3 Majority in favor of the Act in second ‘better than they Oar liquor b'll then woald |

Majority of votes for the Act......... 36,331 a 7 x 000.000 aa ee °°" ssould be compelled to assume the role cf rPARnT nest ** beaten igs Ss A meg 1880 te In the second 63 contests, the votes | *-Frue lemperanes” advocates! One liquor <> i ’ a b:

Tuesday and Weduesdag,

Stock of BOOKS, and Special Sales will bea

Goods vill be disp'ayed on Counters during the day .nd sold at « large discount.

in favor of Britain in 1873, (the last year fa 1 of about 120,009 —_—OF——

of the McD: nald admin: tration), had fallen a A i — ae 2S oe eo Under licens: 120,000 x 4..... ..480,000 gal's. | -

to eleven miliions the wrong side at the | more than couble as im 2 elections 10 {D@ the opponents of the Scott Act rs

end of the inglorious MeKenzie-Cartwright second six years as inthe first six years,| gay the qaautity now con- 7: o

term, You now make comparisons of the the comparison 1s scarcely fair. Let ustry| sumed is... .......0 sseeee- $0,009 “| ;

trade of the country during the two Con- , 2nether meth: d. There have been, during | a - : 4 a

servative administrations. Now, I am not | the 12 years, 126 contests | Prohibited by the Scott Act.... 599,000 ‘* a OD

greatly concerned how you decile that: t& t ' | Im give 480,000, the bquor bil we are here a, ‘¥

matter. ‘* Heads up we =i) tle up you ae contests, the votes cast, J catnhd to, dwind!ing down to 0,000 gallons ! ‘

lose.” It is all in the family. _Butif the ieee es os ee mere new tis surely enough to mike those in the bue’- y Against ee err ee 69,767 necs “sick” and wiive them iuto a campaign poiigenen eT ccs

sii it

JANUA’Y Gth AND 7th. 34

—_— -— - SS

EFORE STOCK-TAKING, I wish rednee my Large, Varied and Valuables

id on the above dates,

sal e

In the Evening, at 7 30 o'clock, an

AUCTION §

there has been only one new county to | Sirn,—In a letter ~ th i ~ | will i i } . ‘ nee ] ; | §i,— e Patriot on Suat-| “ill take place. At either time you will b tound the excess of imports from this or} adopt it, viz, Richnond, P Q, and onle | urdey, the Hon. D Davies nilaat sin f. Peal | sure of receiving BARGAINS. ;

that country, underan equal tariff, with’ the monstrous proposal now made of taxing the trade of Britain and other countries

twenty-two millions of dollarsa year and

allowing American goods to come free !

You say the Conservatives ‘had the luck of being in power during two prosperous periods ” while there was a great depression duriog the Liberal period and ‘ the people were not able to buy expensive goods.” It, is not a little remarkable that the pericds of prosperity should correspond s0 accur- ately with the Conservative regime. and that hard times and Cartwright’s financier- ing should come and go in such close com- pany! But what comes of ali the biue ruin which has been dinned in our ears for the last 12 years if the Editor of the Patriot is right in classing the years from 1880 to 1889 as a ‘‘ prosperous peried.” I am,

fought and bied in the armies of the North, i bs J 4S HOW &- 8 SE

neon tinal

°c

yours ete., ~ i Scant 3) Fraevson. ,

four other distr ets to svetain it, although

ii 1 i it 5 ° tested in 39 distri.ts. All the others re- pas pee question ty the Hae, He. Sing :

iat the editor of the Gnardi have had some experience as a Cab-| . 2 sou © nardiva can find inet Minister and Governor of the North | THEO, L. CHAPPELLF, Diamond Beckstore.

any consolation in the statisties which Iiwest onder ihe McKerzie Administra- | Ch'town, Dec. 31, 1890 dy ti6th wy li

have collated for his benefit, he should cer-jtion. LI would like to put this qo’ s- is9 L. Now, if Mr. Davies is right in his opinion

tainly turn his attention to extracting sun (tion to you: Dv you think it possible for any beams from cucumbers, a process which has Canedian Government to give up the millions hitherto proved conspicuously unsuccessful. Of dollars now collected on liqure, carry a I wish him and you a Happy New Year. total probibition Act, levy diie t taxation on Yours, the peep'e to — good the GcBsionay in the Wines tenia reveruo inorder to try a duubt{uiex periment ? . We are sending out our Annual that no C.nadian Government can giv up the $4,000,000 now collect)d as Dastnent | “tusemenes of Accousts, sat _ dca duties on hquors of «ll kinds, L would like wishing our numerous Cus'omers Sin,—A great many people—people who)‘ know what he thinks of Mr, Laurier’s & Presperous New Year we hepe are in nowise indebred to the rumsellers PTepvsal to give up at least nme milions of Hhey will be able te make prompt.

I ssy it can’t be done.” Ottawa, Dec. 31, 1890.

Has the Scott Act Prohibited?

for favors shown, unless, forsooth, the ruin- doiiars ‘@ year ucw collected on United payments. ing of their boys begets a fraternal feeling— | 5'"<s ro aa