PROHIBITION (?) ORDERS.
Rev. Edward Walker, who has compiled the annual drink bill 0 f the colony for many years past, has just got out the figures for the past year, and is of opinion that “ they do not make pleasant reading.” The increased _ expenditure per head of population last year amounted to Bs, less a halfpenny. Mr Walker urges the need of “a fresh great pledgesigning campaign.” As a matter of sober fact, “pledges” are about as valuable as prohibition orders. When an order is made out against a man or a woman who has made up his or her mind to “swear off’’—well and good. When it is made out against a man or women who has made up his or her mind to violate it as often as possible it is not worth the paper on which it is printed or written. And orders wrung, so to speak, from the intemperate in a moment of mental and physical weakness are worse than useless, because they will surely bo disregarded by the unfortunate creatures to whom they refer, and so make them hypocrites, as well as drunkards. There are, probably, a few isolated cases where a prohibition order saves a man, in spite of himself; but in many instances the issue of an order has been the signal for a “ spree ” of overwhelming dimensions. The authorities should have recognised by this time that prohibition orders do not prohibit the people concerned from obtaining drink; and that, in point of fact, these orders are frequently the means of putting a man wrong who would otherwise be compelled to “straighten up” and keep straight. For instance: a man who is fond of liquor but is not prohibited becomes a nuisance to hotelkeepers by reason of his continually “ hanging around ” the hotels, and the result is that all decent licensees refuse to supply him; he is thus compelled to keep sober, and may eventually becomes respectable citizen. But the “ prohib.” is sober only so long as he is without money, and as his orgies must necessarily be “ on the quiet ” there is no one to hinder him in absorbing as much liquor as he can swallow. For him there is no hereafter ; he drinks till his outraged body refuses to perform its functions, and he dies a drunkard’s horrible death. This is no fancy picture, but one which, unfortunately, is only two often visible in our large cities. The whole blame cannot of course be attributed to the prohibition order system, but many of the victims around whom drink has flung its awful chain will admit that their downward course was accelerated by the issue of an order against them.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PGAMA19070329.2.28
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 8, Issue 26, 29 March 1907, Page 4
Word count
Tapeke kupu
448PROHIBITION (?) ORDERS. Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 8, Issue 26, 29 March 1907, Page 4
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.