SOCIAL DISTINCTIONS IN INEBRIATES' HOMES. Shall they be Recognised?

Free Lance, Volume IV, Issue 206, 11 June 1904, Page 6

SOCIAL DISTINCTIONS IN INEBRIATES' HOMES. Shall they be Recognised?

MR Kettle, SM , has been deterred from sending a female dipsomaniac to the Inebriates Home because he is given to understand from the superintendent that the institution Is too select and respectable for her. The superintendent, m a letter to the S. M., is plainly annoyed that a woman of alleged bad character, previously committed to his charge, had been sent It was because he was annoyed that the S M sent the "fit subject for an inebriates' home" to gaol for two weeks * * * He isn't sure that he won't commit this woman to the Home after all In the meantime, while he is making up his mmd, the woman is in gaol Will anyone pleas© tell us why the inebriety of the well-to-do 1 and otherwise respectable is. to be dispelled amid the comfoi-ts of a State home while the poor and sinful are to be kept out of such a place because forsooth they might contaminate the aristocratic inmates This Home was established for inebriates The State undeitakes to treat, and, if possible, cure them, when they have been committed for such treatment by a magistrate * * * Who knows but that the sins of the woman who is warned out of the institution by the superintendent would disappear if her chief trouble— love of liquor — were removed ? It has been alleged that no control has been exerted on the patients at these institutions. Why not ? Surely a watchful eye on the sinful woman referred to would prevent her from contaminating the lady inebriates who are presumed to be so respectable The Home says to an unfortunate woman "You're drunk and sinful We don't mmd you being drunk. Our ladies are that, but we do mmd that you are a sinner " * • • It means that the unfortunate drunkard who is not respectable m the society sense is kicked back into the slough The people who should rescue her hold up their hands m pious horror, and let her drift. The respectable persons using those inebriate homes have less right to their sanctuary

than the poor, disreputable persons who have outraged the moral code. The respectable ones could be looked after by their friends, who have influence, and can afford to pay for private treatment. • • • Gaol is no place for any kind of a drunkard. He or she is diseased, and gaol won't cure disease. But, if it is right to send a disreputable drunken person to gaol, it is reasonable that a reputable drunken person should be sent too, and not carefully drafted out and sent to a home which was instituted for the sinner as well as the saint, and where all should be treated for inebriety without regard to their social standing The State cannot recognise these caste distinctions