Rodney and Otamatea Times, Waitemata and Kaipara Gazette , 8 July 1905, Page 3
TO THE EDITOR
Sir,—-There appears in your last _ issue a letter under the above headino. by "A Lover of Liberty." If he had • signed himself "A Lover of Whisky " he would have been nearer the mark otherwise he would be glad to hear that so able a man as Mr Woolley was , coining m our midst, and interfering with the liberty of the subject by pre, venting a few who are interested in the liquor traffic from placing a temptation m the way of the subject; which is the greatest stumbling block to humanity. Under the influence of drmk .-- man is not responsible for his actions r We all know, Sir, and so does "A Lover of Liberty " that under the in.fluence of drink, the worst forms of ffi^-and-cruelty are perpetrated, and man loses all self-respect, bringing misery to those dependant on him. Did ".Lover of Liberty " read ah arti'cleinthe "Herald" by Sir Fredrick Treves, (the greatest living surgeon) on the use of alcholic liquors—which he says should only be sold by chemists, under the same heading as other poisonous drugs. Now I would like to know, sir, where the liberty of the subject comes in. This so called "Lover of Liberty " is trying to tickle a mountain with a feather, when he • talks.about the thousands of pounds in wages, that prohibition would prevent being paid, and how many men, women and children, invalid sisters and brothers would be left penniless. Yes, he uses the term flung out of employment, I will ask him how many homes are wrecked, through the husband spending all his earnings on drink and rendering himself unfit for work, and then he joins the unemployed, and helps to block the footpath, at some hotel corner. I would also like to ask him to find out from the numerous benevolent societies, how many women and children are rendered homeless, and dependant on charity—through the direct cause of his trade. Also how many old age pensioners there .are in N.Z., who have become dependant on the state, and wear his trade mark ? I might inform him that the proportion of ..-^ ages connected with his business is shiall out of all proportion to other trades —thus the profits are large. A few hops, a lot of chemicals and a river of water, make an ocean of beer. I hope all the wise residents of Warkworth, will show their good sense by g^_gjving;^Mr; Woolley a hearty reception when. n^:'^d'h.e-a7- - - Christianity and whisky don't go well together, so we l s will leave it out of the question. "Moral suasion for the man who drinks, Mental suasion for the man who thinks, Legal suasion for the drunkard-maker, . And local suasion for Home's worst heartbreaker."
I am, etc., The Oiiier. Eellow,
TO THE EDITOR.
Sir, —In your paper of July Ist, under the nome de plume of a " Lover of Liberty," he discants on Mr Bull. Imagine that gentleman, not beingable to answer such a question except by confessing that he did not know what the prohibition patty would do with those unemployed in the drink traffic. Why, as I heard another temperance lecturer once say, if nothing else could be found for them to do, they could be clothed in feathers, and put to iateh eggs. This at least would be an occupation that would save an incubator and do good to society, not unaPoycd evil. But what is Liberty ? Is it to lie, to cheat, to steal, to murder or to do any other thing that will injure your fellow either in his person, character, or in any. other way ? I feel that " Lover of Liberty "jwill say without hesitation, that all these things are wrong, and that we should be restrained from doing them, because if they were permitted society could not existTl Yet the suppression of these things is an interference with the liberty of the 1 individual. The wh ole pu leric of ci vil-" ised society is based on restraint of individual will, so that the mass of the community maybe protected against the unbridled desires of tho few, which are not Liberty, but License. But leaving out the question of liberty, of which the prohibitionist is the true exponent, viewed from the base that society operates on, the good of the many. It can be easily shown, where the liquor tr_ihc gives cm ploy mout to one, its "abolition would increase employment, at the least estimation five timc>?. I hope thai: "Lover of Liberty " has an open mind, and that when the time comes to vole ho will ca^fc it for the abolition of the liquor traffic, as being in the true interects of liberty and the betterment of mankind.—l am, etc.,
TO THE EDITOR
Sin,- -The reason Mr Woolley is not visiting Warkworth as at first.announced is due lv a (.-.iiilcully in def.i;:i:oly fixing a day that would not hamper his other engagements-. Owing to tho impossibility of giving due notice the committee.felt reluctantly compelled to leave over iho aisit, with the hope it niav yet bo ma do before the election. I can join with ' Lover of Liberty's wish thnt all tho wise residents of Warkworth will be stirring not only when Mr Woolley arrives, but also when Mrs Harrison Lee, another notable speaker, comes. As to the disturbance to the labour market that may ensue upon No License being carried your correspondent must have misunderstood Mr Bull, in imagining that point had not received consideration. It is one of the strong arguments for No License, and one w/hich the writer heard Mr Bull deal with. The fact is, it is hard to find any article of consumption upon
which so little is spent in its production for labour as alcoholic stimulants. Over £3,000,000 is estimated to be spent on liquor in New Zealand each year. The number of persons who are engaged in producing- and selling the various form,-, of alcohol, who would ; need to put their hand to other work, j even if the trade was totally extingushed in New Zealand, would not be more than 1500 persons. £2000 per capita per year set free for other purposes should provide a good living for each, besides increasing the community's wealth instead of dissipating it. There is in reality only one argument left to gentlemen of your correspondent's mind, and could that be overcome alcohol would never again go down human throats. It is 'we like it.' From every aspect of the subject the evidence increases. Even the King's physician, Sir Frederick Treves, has felt constrained to raise his voice in utter condemnation of its use. Even an opponent like Dr Bakewell says he will vote No License because of the increasing number of young men who are starting the drinking habit. If our race is to progress we must view alcohol drinking as the Japanese do ojuum smoking, and ban it. When its effects on the physique, on the morals, on the home life, on prosperity and on posterity are altogether bad,rthe license of the individual must not stand before the liberty of the race.—l am, etc.,