Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890. The Soaker.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue III, 17 June 1890, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1890. The Soaker.

♦ Wild yells for 'liolp, slmll screams of pain, break tlio stillness of tlio niirlit aiv. an n»lv thud — , thon silent. What iu't ? Nothing, d fi ar readers, nothing, only some drunken brute- abusing tho only (bins' safe fov him to do - his wifo Do you moan to say this is nothing? Ocr • tainly, no one has a right to intor fore, tho woman may possibly b» injured but that is her look out, the law allows men to g^efc d unlc, even make a very handsome profit out of their doins; so, and some one must suffer. You cannot, let meo (( put an enemy in their moutlis, to steal away their brains " without expoctiny so'no foolish thinff to follow. The law nl'ows anybody to inter- , fore, but it is at their own risk, and } j cases are common enough were con- •

I tinned drunkenness is indulged in. and because the man's own familyhang back, there is no one to take him to task for it. This is one of of the pleasantries indulged in by our legislators in a prohibition clause. The drunkard of any shape is a nuisanco, but the biggest nuisance is the man who is always drunk, but always quiet, and by some wonderful agency always able to carry himself straight, — the soaker. He can commence to take drink the first thing in the morning and keep on doing so till night, he is always ful but never quite, being always able to take another glass. This is the man who laughs at all legislation, because, having be*n able to bounce his wife and children from interference, no one else can gather the meshes of the law around him. A publican is not selling liquor to a drunken person when selling to him, because who is to say that he is drunk ? What is drunkene3s ? No policeman has ever been able to give a good description applicable to general cases, and the law has not. It is only the man's family or a' friend who can charge him witH " lessening his estate ' as no one else knows what estate he is possessed of. The case of the " Soaker " makes it very clear that the Licensing Act needs further amendments, so that the^ mere fact of anyone taking an immoderate quantity of a'coholic liquor in a day, commas a breach of the law, and that the purveyors of liquor should be answerable for supplying any excess over the amount, and that the police should prosecute both offend.- rs in a simi ar manner to which they would a breach of any other law. The prohibition clause in the Licensing Act upbears to have been put thero grudgingly, and hedged around with so many safeguards so as to allow a toper to get th« utmost that he can carry, is it any wonder then that the man gets too nnicn. practise alone makes perfect, and tho old soaker is the one who has dis covered how simple it is to get drunk by Act of Parl ament. The majority of the public are not heavy drinkers, and have no sympathy with drunkards, and they cannot as yet see why, in the matter of drink, they sluuld be called upon to refrain from alcohol, because the majority take too much. The total abstinence societies constantly tell us that a.l ought to abstain, so that the few might be saved and imply, that without some social revolution of this nature, their task is hopeless. Under ttose ci eumstances it would appear but fair, that before the majority are called upon to make such sacrifice, all means tlias are possible should first beat.empted by the Government, and we hold that if the sentimentalise about the freedom a man to get drunk, as long as he does not annoy his neighbour (parliamentary, as a committer of a bad act rnnst a ways annoy another person 1 ) was knocked on the head, and treated as much as a crime (which it is, only more so) as to use bad language, a stronger footing will hava been obtained to keep men sober by Act of 'Parliament.