THE PROHIBITION MOVEMENT.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1979, 9 February 1914, Page 5

THE PROHIBITION MOVEMENT.

Sir, —I notice that "Temperance" in your issue of January 28 insists that if the revenue now paid by the consumers of license is not paid by them in',that way that it will be lost to tho Government This was not so. We havei an;extensive .tariff on general merchandise, , and so . the money now unwisely :si>ent'by a., section of the people on intoxicants, will' still be spent on other dutiable goods, for .it will be absurd to' imagine that men will refuse to buy real'necessities of- life because under Prohibition they have been prevented buying at least v.ery. dangerous luxur r ieS." The increased consumption of other merchandise will easily recoup the Treasury the amount it loses on tho duties nbw'levied on' intoxicants.

Again, it seems to mo that "Temperance" is slightly contradictory in that ho asserts that Prohibitionists do not propose to tax themselves to make good the loss ho assumes must ensue to the revonue. For argument sake, only, admitting tlio loss must be made, it seems to me in that caso tho Prohibitionists must inevitably shoulder their share of any of tho taxation ttyit may bo imposed if new taxation is found necessary, or pay their share of tho Customs duties collected on the increased quantity of general merchandise that will be consumed under Prohibition. Prohibition will certainly moro equally divide the taxation if 'any extra is needed that license now does; but Prohibitionists are patriotic and will not complain should they pay something extra for a sober community. "Temperance's" referenco to prohibiting fire and water as well as drink seems to me to descend from the 6ubliine to the ridiculous, as is his assertion that they are alike necessary. Thousands of men and women who onco used 'ntoxicants have voluntarily abandoned tho habit, and discovered they were much benefited by the change. Hundreds of thousands have never formed the habit,- and life assurance statistics of many officcs have proved that total abstainers have an expectancy of lifo one-third longer than tho moderate drinker, so tho necessity argument won't hold water. Water and'firo, on the other hand, are absolute necessities. The majority of our criminals are drinking men. On entering the gaol tho tap is turned off at onco; they do not die; but several gaolers have informed me that these victims of the drink habit get u%w leases of lifo.

Then it is bordering on the ludicrous to assert that as insanity has increased the consumption of drink has lessened' in Great Britain. Surely your correspondent is not ignorant of the fact that largo quantities of home-made intoxicants are consumed which do not figure in tho Customs of- cxcise returns. ' ( ■_ But returning to the causes of insanity, the Lunacy Commissioners in their ■sixty-first 'report show that "intemperance in drink" during tho last five years has prove.! to be the greatest cause of insanity among men, being responsible for 22.1 per cent-, of the admissions. In the sixty-third report the Commissioners says (page 23): "Of toxic influences, the taking of alcohol was assigned amongst private patients in males 17.3, females 7.1, amongst male paupers 24.0, females 9.1.; whilo there was a family 'history of alcohol'sm in 5.3 of both sexos." Tho Commissioners, however, .candidly admit that there is so .'reticence regarding addictiou to drink as a cause of insanity that , the figures now given are far from a complete estimate: Other high' medical authorities placo the percentage of insanity duo to jdrink at double the above figures, and even higher still -than that. Then we question the accuracy of tho figures "Temperance" quotes. I have by mo the Alliance Year Book. It gives the drink bill for 1899 as amounting to £185.927,349, and not £160,000,000. Tho following five years were all years- of heavy consumption. The following aro the correct figures:— Expenditure on drink 1900" 184,881,196 , 1901 181,788,245 1902 179,499,817 1903 171,445,271 . 1901 168.987.165 Is it any wonder after such a phenomenal consumption of drink that in-, sanity rapidly increased? Referring to' the above figures, they show Sir , James C. Browne's statement, that tho drink bill, had not been higher than £161,500,000 to be, if quoted accurately, as fallacious as your correspondent's deductions therefram. . The statement that I supplied a lot of uncheckablo figures I about Maine, Massachusetts, and Kansas is questioned... My authority is no

less a person than the Teeent Governor of Kansas, W. R. Stubbs, Another bogy "Temperance" trots out is wo want to stagnate business, etc. Recently, with bars closed, although the men were idle, the fruiterers and greengrocers in Auckland experienced quite a. boom in business, which ceased as soon as tlio bars were again opened. The trade is a real Ishmaelito among legitimate traders. — I am, etc., WILLIAM RICHARDSON. Queen Street Auckland.