NO-LICENSE IN MASTERTON.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10114, 8 October 1910, Page 6

NO-LICENSE IN MASTERTON.

(To tlic Editor.)

Sir,—Two letters have appeared hi vonr columns, recently, signed by Mr J. J- Kelliher. Some statements in the one appearing in your issue of October oth are somewhat misleading and unfair. Mr Kelliher savs that during the twelve months of' No-License, ending June .JUtft last, over sixty furniture sales took place in our town, inferring that it was the result of No-License. Now, it is a fact that fojr about twelve months previous to No-License bein a carried a depression had set m, partly owing to general Dominion depression and largely to the Borough loan moneys being expended, and of course the floating population who had come to Masterton during boom time, also many who had bi-en employed on Borough works, besides others connected with our railway service, which had been reduced to merely a local line, had to move on. No-License had very httlo to do with so many people - leaving our town. When No-License was carried, then; were about eighty empty houses within the. Borough, and tncre arc considerably loss than that at the present time. Then, with regard to the Caledonian Society s losses, which Mr Kelliher attributes to No-License. I think that most people will agree that the Caledonian Societ vpeople have themsee.vs to blame for their present position. Some three years ago the Masterton Borough Council refused permission to sell liquor at the Society's sports in the Park, and the Society promply decided to hold their sports on the Showgrounds, which in bad weather is cold and bleak, and in sunny weather is burning hot and void of shade of any sort. The Park was an ideal spot for sports, and hundreds of

men and children would go there who would not go to the showgrounds. Hence the falling off in their finances. Everybody knows that the reason of the St. Patrick's Day sports being a failure was entirely due to climatic conditions prevailing at the time of holding their meeting. If ou U(-al racing club i-.'.s mkvu a loss, then I think it is a v>iy ihnrable thing, whetliev due to NoLicense or other causes. I would I point out to Mr Kelliher what. the | annual report of the largest trading ! concern in our town (W.F.C.A.)I sa y S —"The result shows a net profit ( for this eyar of £10,600, as against £6436 of last year, being a net in-'■icii-rflf £4104. You : ,vM rcr«> vc hav • i, c'uded in the alloc uioi rf tlie profits the resumption of bonuses to employees, managers and heads of departments, which we had reluctantly to omit last year." Might I not mention, also, that "eighty new shares were taken up in the Masterton Permanent investment and Building Society last year, as compared with twenty eight in the previous year." ,1 have observed the ' note of despondency ih Mr. Kelliher's letters, and perhaps many people will sympathise with him, for in all great social reforms, where many are benefited, seme arc sure to suffer somewhat, and as the Masterton Court returns show that No-License means less crime, and consequently '■ less work for solicitors and their ; clerks.Let Mr Kelliher - "cheer up," i for if his particular line of business is languishing through No-License, there are other avenues in life of a remunerative nature; for have you not pointed out in" your columns that shearers and their cooks make big fat cheques these days, so that Mr Kelliher does not "have to live" in our town. I am reminded of a limerick composed by a Home lady i during the time the Licensing Bill was before the House of Commons:

A temperance-speaker said "assesC This Bill is for the good of . the masses." But lie altered his mind when he happened to find, That his aunt drew .her income from "Basses!'

While Mr Kelliher has consistently opposed No-License, I have a suspicion that he must have an aunt in "the trade."—l am, etc., TWENTY YEARS' RESIDENT. To the Editor. Sir,—ln your sub-leader yesterday you ask, are the public paying too dear for the service received from the fire department? • I think, "Sir, this matter should be gone into. It seems strange to me that Masterton should require such a large army of fire-fighters as it has had to maintain in the past. Fifteen years ago there were between 60 and 70 firemen here, while Talmerston North, a larger town, were working a good fire service with thirty men. Some years later, when the high pressure service was installed, one brigade out of j three that the public had to supportformed itsef into a. Firs Folicr ' but the numbel'3 did not decrease, and white" MaatSi'ton supported sixty, Wang&nui, New Plymouth, Greyrhouth, Oamaru, and other towns were runnng an efficient fire service with about thirty men in each Brigade. After a lot of unnecessary trouble and expense, the Borough Council, who were authorities in those days, woke up and combined the Kuripuni and town brigades, and put them under one control. After that there were only fifty firefighters in our town to maintain. Then the Fire Board took control, and the membership was cut down to fortythree. So in Masterton, with a population of 5000, it takes 43 men to fight the flames, while Invercargill,

with 8000 inhabitants, only has 21 men in its fire service, and they do their work as well as our 43.' Strange, isn't it? At Petone the population is 7300, and 21 men do all the fire work. Why do Masterton want 40? In concluison, I may say there are places in New Zealand, with a population of from 5000 to 7000, which are working successfully with 20 n fln, and in some caea under. Once again I ask, does Masterton require 43? Thanking you for space.—l am, etc., B. GARDNER. Masterton, October 7th, 1910.