THE REV. FEE AND STEVE BOREHAM.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume IV, Issue 273, 23 October 1902, Page 3

THE REV. FEE AND STEVE BOREHAM.

TO THI BDIXOR. Sir, —By the courtesy of a friend, a eopy of your issue of the 11th mst., is to hand. It came while I was absent from home —hence the delay in dealing with it. _ , Your correspondent, Mr S. Boreham, must be troubled with a very short memory for some things. He says, “ Dealing with Mr Fee’s figures, by the applause of a large section of the audience, I took it that I had shown that the rev. gentleman’s figures were not reliable.” Now, Sir, you and your readers will be surprised to hear that Mr Boreham did not even attempt to deal with the figures I put before the meeting at Oamaru; and it will be news to those who were present to hear that he showed that my figures were unreliable. Perhaps if I restate them in your columns he will, at his leisure, point out to your readere wherein they are inconect. 1. I stated that the consumption of intoxicating drink per head of the population of N. Z. had increased yearly since 1895. See official Year Book. . . . . 3. I stated that the convictions for drunkenness bad increased yearly during the same period, and I supplied ' tb® following figures Jn 1896 the convictions were 4916 «• 1897 ” ” ” !lg , .. 1898 „ „ » 5W9 „ 1899 » ” " SSS - „ 1900 „ .. •. 7299 1901 „ „ .. 8037 Mr Boreham never questioned these figures and he is not likely to do so. 8. I stated that of the 8057 convicted for the first time as far aa 1 Commissioner Tunbridge and the police know. Also that 4220 of thest were men and boys, and 286 womet and girls, and, Sir, be never questioner

these {nets and figures. He could.lb, disprove one of tbern ; he can’t now.

4. I stated thot thsre was abundant evidence that young New Zealanders were drinking to excess, and I quoted Editors, Magistrates, correspondents in public prints, etc., who could not bo iccused of bias in favour of No-license, to show that this was so. Mr Berabam did not attempt to refute this evidence. I reminded the audience that Freetrade in drink had been tried and failed, that High License had been tried and failed, that Low License had been tried and failed; and I invited them to give No-license a trial. 1 led evidence to show that the place was exceedingly prosperous under Nolicense —that, in fact, No-license was . yearly increasing in favour iu Clutha itself. I quoted the voting for Nolicense and Continuance in Clutha electorate since 1893, viz. :

1893 1896 1899 No-license - 1642 1989 2170 Continuance 487 1618 1393 Mr Boreham did not show these figures to be unreliable. I specified between 30 and 40 substantial improvements, chiefly new erections, which were made or were being made in the town of Balchuha within the lust twelve months. As a set-off against this Mr Boreham referred to a large number of new houses, over 200 I think, which he said had been erected in the Waimale district daring the past year. But he, conveniently, forgets that I pointed out that the cases were not parallel, that the erections I spoke of were in Balclutha and were not the result of land being cut up into sections by the Government and settled upon, involving additional improvements. 5. I supplied the following contrast between Ashburton and Balclutha with regard to convictions for drunkenness from 1896 to 1901 inclusive: Ashburton Balclutha

population 2322. population 1017 1896 —67 convictions 0 convictions 1897 1898 1899 —llO „ 2 1900 1901 Totals 142 14 I explained that for 1901 I had not been able to put my hand on the Government figures for Ashburton, so t >ok the average for the five preceding years, which is likely to be under rather than over the truth.

6. I pointed out that in Sterling, the nearest town to Balclutha, at the lut poll 225 voted No license, while only 121 voted continuance. Also that Mataura and Bruce, the adjoining electorates, were strongly in favour of No-license.

7. I read a letter dated September Ist, 1902 from the convener of the Temperance committee of the Presby. teriau Church of New Zealand containing resolutions passed by the Clutha Presbytery, in which they speak in the highest terms of the benefits of No-license,

Now, sir, I shall be obliged if Mr Borehain will point out wherein the foregoing figures are incorrect or unreliable.

With regard to the Biblical argument let me say I challenge him, or anyone else to point to one passage in the good old Book that upholds or defends the licensed liquor traffic. Apologising for the length of this letter, and thanking you, sir, iu anticipation, —I am, etc., Thos. Fbk.

P.S. —j don’t profess to be so familiar with the natural history of fleas as your correspondent is. I have not been so much in their company perhaps, but I expect the Prohibitionists will be like them in one respect on polling day, viz., too many far Steve Boreham and Co. —T.F.