MR MACANDREW AND THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

Evening Star, Issue 3902, 26 August 1875, Page 3

MR MACANDREW AND THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

To the Editor. Sir, —I am utterly at a loss to undtrst uid what purpose your correspondent signing himself “ Use, Not Abuse” intended to serve by the publication of the long extinct “from a paper by J. W. Steele, of London,” which appears in yoar issue of Monday. The < idy purpose, as it appears to me, it does sieve is to illustrate the utter irrevalence of very much that is written by the advocates of the liquor trade—a traile which, according to John Bright, produces B crime, disorder, and madness in the country.” I gave evidence apt to the point and practical that the adoption, not of a simply permissive, but prehibitory Liquor Bill did not ruin, did not even injure legitimate hotel businesses, and your coiTespondent treats us to a long statement of the probable operation of the Permissi”e Bill. Plow does the opinion of Mr J. W. Steel“whcever that gentleman may be, and I regret I have not the honor of his acquaintance—affect the question between his Honor and myself as to the effects on hotel business of a cessation of the trade in grog ? If you will permit me to make an extract from an article of the ‘ London Times ’ of the 17th June, which deals with the recent Permissive Bill debate in the House of Commons. I think your very intelligent readers will "say that the few lines of the Thunderer completely smash up the whole of the sophistical reasoning of Mr J. W. Steele. The ' Time.s 1 says : —The principle of non-interference with the free development of a community is a leading principle of our legislation, but no one who is acquainted with the laws now on the statutebook can pretend that we enforce it under all circumstances, without regard to time, place, or persons. The princii le confessedly rests on the assumption that by means of it we secure a balance of advantages in the character of the people, but the moment we appreciate this ground on which our principle rests we are forced to acknowledge that the application of e principle must be regulated with reference to the B Po c i al circumstances of each case.”—l am, &c., Permissive Bill Man.