THE DRINK TRAFFIC.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 2780, 8 May 1890, Page 2

THE DRINK TRAFFIC.

Stu,—Your correspondent "Iconoclast" provokes a few words in reply to his letter in Saturday's issue. In what interests he writes, or what may be his motives does not now concern me, and I therefore make no attempt to discuss them. Moreover, as a recent arrival in the district I cannot pretend to know the merits of the present discussion, so far as they are of a purely Jlucal character. Whether or not two, three, four, or more licensed hotels are required in Hamilton depends on the drinking propensities of the people ; and of these I do not pretend at present to be able to form an estimate. But " Iconoclast" deals also with some general principles on which I do pretend to have an opinion. One is that the closing of one or two hotels would not decrease the consumption of liquor —in his opinion not even by •' a glass a year." On this point I would just make this observation, such a, result would be widely dilferent from what has taken place elsewhere. Those who have studied this question, and watched the operations of the liquor trade closely, know that increased facilities for drinking invariably mean a largerconsumption. No one knows this better than the wholesale dealers in liquor, Hence their strenuous efforts to prevent any decrease in the number of licenssd houses. Then again " Iconoclast" questions whether the " pub," on the ground of public utility, has big advantage over the churches, etc. No one questions their value as houses of accommodation ; but this is distinct from the liquor traffic. The difference between the objects for which they exist, and those for which churches exist, is so great that it is difficult ti; institute a comparison. In so far as the " pub" is merely a liquor shop, its work is in direct opposition to that of the churches. The work of the churches is to teach men to live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world, whereas the liquor traffic is the greatest known enemy of sobriety, righteousness, andgodlifnesa, Again " Iconoclast" says the " |mb" is "not such a tax on the community" as the churches, " and is a source of revenue to the town, while the others do not even pay rates." I am sorry to liavo to strike a blow at "Iconoclast's" idols ; but such a fallacy deserves exposure. The " pub " is a " tax on the community." It exists solely by public support, and regarded merely as a place for the licensed ■sale of liquor, the only valuable return it gives to the public is the amount of the license fee. The rates would be paid if it were used for any other purpose. In other words, the pnblic must spend from £10 to £13 in the liquor shop, for every Jol which the publican gives back to the public revenue. If tliis is not a "tax on the community," I confess I don't know what it. In addition to this, your readers know as well as I do that the habitues of the "pub" are not the most industrious and thrifty members of the community, and this class makes a large drain on the resources of the community, when they come to be supported by charity and public taxation. Do the churches tax the community after this fashion? I may be pardoned perhaps for saying that ministers of religion work harder for their money than men in any other profession in this colony. And the result of their work is not the creation of paupers, who, haying wasted their own substance in riotous living, have to live upon the substance of others. The churches do not tax the community by sending their devotees to live at the public expense in our gaols, hospitals, and asylums. When I have seen the frequenters of the " pub " turned into the street after the last shilling has been

spent, bereft of all that constitutes true manhood ; and when I have looked on halfstarved wives and children, and the desolation of drinlc-mined homes, then I have had forced upon me a lesson in social science, and have seen how the " pub '' taxes the community. If the church taxed the community to such an extent as this, or if tho fruits of its teaching were the production of such specimens of humanity, or such degredation of the home, then certainly the church would not count among its ministers, yours truly, Samuel Lawky. Wesleyan Parsonage, Hamilton.