CORRESPONDENCE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2302, 22 September 1908, Page 1

CORRESPONDENCE.

I rCorrospomlonco on public mutters is welcomed at nil times, but it must bo distinctly understood that this iournal is in no way associated with the opinions of its correspondents.] TRUE TEMPERANCE AND NOLI CENSE. [To tub Editor.] Sir, —In bis reply to my lottor Dr. 'Smith admits that a man with the I craving for alcohol in bis tissues will stick at nothing in order to obtain it, and ho suggests that victims ol tins nature should be shut up in a home. This I quite agree with, but I question very much whether limiting the facilities' for providing alcohol will act as a deterrent of over-indulgence. Take France for instance, where the facilities for obtaining alcohol are the greatest in the world. There every cafe is a wino shop, no license is required to sell alcoholic liquors, and wino is as common at the meal table as tea. is here. Yet in France lastyear with a population of over 40 millions there wore less than 700 convictions for drunkenness, and of these over ‘250 were in Paris alone. The lesson of Franco is that it- is better to teach the use of stimulants than to try and prevent- the abuse bv legislation. Personally’ I find that tea gets on my nerves and plays havoc with luy digestion, cocoa is bilious, and cold water is unpalatable, Inrb a bottle or wino or ale is to mo -a pleasant ami comforting drink, and I fail to sec why I should take out a prohibition order against myself, Dr. Smith, and all tho rest of the sober community, by voting nolicense merely on account of there being a few drunkards wandering about, whom, as Dr. Smith admits, the State should coniine in a home for physical and mental treatment. The whole point of my previous letter was to suggest that to secure temperance it is better to rely on education. reason, and example t-lian on tho polieo force. You can, of course, make stealing, drunkenness and every other offence “less easy and less popular” by tho presonco of tho police, but I take it that the reason why Dr. Smith, myself and 99 per cent of tho community do not steal safes or get obnoxiously drunk is not from fear of tho constable, hut- simply from our having no inclination to commit such an anti-social act. As I asked in my last, does the Doctor believe in salvation by Act of Parliament? If so, what becomes of his theory of free will and moral responsibility? When the Doctor gets on economic grounds his arguments are even more unsound. The law of wages shows that- the wage-earner gets just what is sufficient to keep him according to the cost of living in + he country concerned, and the question of drink, tobacco, or any other luxury lias very little concern with ids economic position. The proletariats of India, Turkey, ami Egypt are most abstemious, but they are in 1.0 better economic position than those in other countries. If the average standard of living includes meat three times a day, alcohol, tobacco, and tailor-made clothes, the worker gets wages up to this standard, and the few who are satisfied with Jess c-an save the difference as tho“reward of ,abstinence.” If the workers of New Zealand were content with a handful of rice and a mat-, wages would soon fall to that standard, and supposing for instance tobacco, tea, and alcohol were absolutely excluded and prohibited in this.country, the only economic “gain” to the wageearner would be a drop in wages, and liis opportunity of saving by means of abstinence would bo proportionately lessened. That is an economic axiom which is beyond controversy.—l am, etc., P. G. ANDREW, NO-LICENSE. [To the Editor.] Sir.—ln a letter which appeared in your issue of September 16tli “Britisher” (save the mark) trios to bluff the people into tho belief that Ashburton is much more drunken under no-license than under license. Judging from a comparison with an advertisement appearing in your Saturday’s issue, there is something in common with “Britisher” and the advertiser which leads one to suspect than one is a replica of tiiq, othermanufactured to deceive. Since Ashburton hecamo a no-license electorate tho boundaries have been altered, and it now includes six hotels that ply their business and no doubt noiicenso Ashburton is credited with a great amount of liquor that- flows ■through these channels, and tho liquor interests are not slow to play on any weak spot that may tell with any discredit to other parts of tho community under no-liconsc. “Britisher” has certainly not taken note of Mr. Wliiteliouso’s testimony, and no doubt- with good reason on his part, for ho has tried to trick the public into tho belief that Mr. 'Whitehouse lias lately spoken to tho discredit of no-license when the contrary is tho case, and it is up to “Britisher” to acknowledge his error or apologise for his wilful distortion of facts. Mr. Wliitehouso says, “'When lie first came (to Ashburton) there was the same loafing about the public-house, the samo disgusting scenes, tho same temptations to the boys, and the samo liability to insults as in other towns, but he was pleased -to say the town was quite clean now, arid in fact, lie believed, one of tho cleanest in New Zealand. He was president of the football and numerous social clubs, and could safely say tho practice of drinking was fast dying out. He thanked God for no-lieense, and he intended to do his best to keep it, and to extend the bounds of its influnce.” Forty-six business men and others have said “That Ashburton is as sound to-day as in any period in its history, any statement to the contrary, which implies otherwise, is recklessly contrary to facts.” It is well to understand that the great sums of money spent by the liquor interest- to get back license is not spent for tho public weal, but that they may continue a nefarious traffic which supplies them with this money. To understand that the people have been more thrifty under no-licenso the Government Savings Bank returns are abundant testimony. In 1902-3 (license) the accounts opened were 486, deposits £33,887, accounts closed 228, withdrawals £27,277. In 1907-8 (noli icense) the accounts opened were 515, deposits £56,462, accounts closed 250, withdrawals £39,062. These figures speak for themselves, and show that wherever liquor is prohibited the working man’s savings increase accordingly with less chance of liis spending liis last days in the poor house. Then we have the significant fact of the Ashburton building society, another working man’s institution, putting up a record. In 1903 (license) the total loans for tho year was £68,720, new loans £14,927, tlposits £45,533; year ending 31st January, 1908 (no-licenso) total loans £111,885, new loans £35,110, deposits £78,888. This shows clearly that the working man is the ono to benefit tho most by closing the open bar.—l am, etc., “TRUTH.”

[To the Editor.] Sir, —In your issue of September 16, “Britisher” says that “Now Zealander’’ merely quoted trio Court returns and other facts that substantiated them, and they refuted “Britisher’s” assertions. Facts arc stubborn things, and as .long as “Britisher” indulges in using tho proverbial red (herring -and endeavors to bluff the people “New Zealander” will continue to doubt- anything lie may havo to say. Britisher further say's: I have gone to some trouble to' ascertain the true official position, etc., and quotes the Licensing Amendment Act to substantiate a report

that gives no definite time, uiul Britisher” is very careful to hide the fact that this' report may bo for the whole term since Ashburton came tinder no-liconse, but loads ttho public to infer that they are for the past twolvo months, and this is a sample of ‘Brtisher’s” veracity. Divitlo the figures by live anil what becomes of them? I challenge “Britisher” to go to the same trouble and gel, other figures for tho same period preceding no-liconso and then make another comparison and let tho public see the result. It would cortainly astonish them to “Britisher’s” discredit. Evidently “Britisher”’ has money he is anxious to part with, and I am prepared to take it provided tho following terms will suit him: I will pay ,Ci) to the Hospital if “Britisher” can prove that Ashburton lias been as drunken under no-lconse as when under license. (Ashburton Court records to decide.) Hailing to, prove this, ho to pay £5 to the Gisborne No-license League.. If “Britisher” is so assured that the brewers are doing a better trade under no-license then brewers must be great fools to spend thousands of pounds, in the way they are spending it in their endeavors to discredit tho success cf no-licenso and bring back the open bar. In May last, ono of the largest and most enthusiastic mass meetings ever hold in Ashburton passed the following resolution: “That recognising the immense benefit conformal upon this district by six years of nolicenso in tho reduction of drunkenness and crime, and domestic happiness, public decency, and general prosperity, and undeterred by the outrageous misrepresentation of the party which has boon made by the advocates of tho liquor traffic with a view to securing the restoration of licenses, this public meeting of Ashburton electors express its determination to use legitimate efforts to securo carrying of the poll against restoration, and to extinguish the six houses recently added to tho electorate.”—l am, etc., “NEW ZEALANDER.” [To the Editor.] Sir, —Your correspondent, “A True Britisher,” in last Friday’s issue, admits that under no-licenso there may be as much liquor consumed as before, but denies that there is the same drunkenness in Ashburton as before. Is not this trying to create a distinction without a difference? For, if tho same community arc consuming tho samo amount of liquor under no-license as under license, it naturally follows there must bo a similar proportion of drunkenness. In support of his argument he quotes tlio police returns, and in so doing he justifies my previous contention that the dirt is there still, only it is behind the door. Arid this accounts for police returns showing a lesser number of drunks than formerly because theso same drunks are behind their own doors, where the police can neither see them nor touch them. The “Good Old Book” advises us to beware of secret sins. Yet here we have the prohibition, or 1110-license party decidedly sanctioning and fostering them. Now, why is this? In the first place they are doing evil in the fond but, delusive hope that good will come of it. They take into their ranks tho inconsistent and the vengeful, and hope hy the aid of 6uch strength—to succeed where they could never succeed if they had to stand alone. Further, the 110-license party have been guilty of forming an unholy alliance. In order to gratify their lust for power they have made a compromise -with the devil to this effect: That if he (the devil) will give them his assistance to closo the open bar, in return for this lie is to have tho privilego of taking liquor ■into any house ho may choose, and thus contaminate the women and children who have, never been brought int ocontacb with it before. , The Parliamentary return I previously quoted chows that this is so. That under no-licenso 121,113 gallons of liquor Bias gone into Ashburton homes and, what is more, the cleric of the Magistrate's Court there cam give you the manic of every home it lias gone into. Tho 110-license party represent themselves ns being very anxious to remove temptation from the paths of tho young. With such a quantity of liquor as above quoted, going directly into the homos of the people, what' 'is tho possibility of the youngsters’ chance when their elders’ backs aro turned ? Tho prohibition or no-licenso party aro a very anxious lot, and with your permission, Sir, I shall endeavor to show the cause of thoir anxiety from their own printed words later on. —I am. etc., “BRITISHER.”