TEMPERANCE COLUMN

Evening Star, Issue 21638, 6 February 1934, Page 3

TEMPERANCE COLUMN

(Published by arrangement with th« United Temperance Reform Council.) fA.II liquids seek the lowest level, but alcohol takes you with it. BABY’S DEATH. OVERDOSE OF ALCOHOL. “Death from asphyxia probably accidentally caused by the administration of an excessive quantity of alcohol for a child of such tender years,” was the finding of the city coroner (Mr H. H. Farrington, S.M.) recently \vhen an inquiry was made concerning the death of Pamela Marie Blanchfiekl, six months old baby, who died at her parents’ house at No. 726 Darling street, Rozelle. Mrs Blanchfield gave evidence that the child became ill on June 22; she developed a bad cough. At 11 p.m. she gave tne baby a tcaspoonful of brandy diluted with water. When Mrs Blanchheld awoke in the morning the child was dead. . . Dr Stratford Sheldon, giving evidence, said that it seemed an extraordinary amount of alcohol to give an infant of this age. _ “ I would not like to say it would poison a child, but it would act as a powerful narcotic, said Dr Sheldon. . And that, my friends—is that. ‘Grit’s’ Clown hates to rake up the sorrows of the dead baby’s relatives, but since ‘ Grit ’ was knee-high to a bumble bee it has taken the stand that alcohol was no use medicinally—that it was a poison. We sympathise very earnestly with the immediate relatives of the dead child; they were misled by the hoary old lie about alcohol being a medicine. The cemeteries of the world are stuffed full of folks who were hoaxed by the same impudent and unscrupulous falsehood. . ... ■ Alcohol is not a medicine—it is a dangerous narcotic drug. STRAWS IN THE WIND. Two recent police court cases “drunken driving” and driving under the influence.” In the first case Mr Sutherland, S.M., at Parramatta Court, lined the offender £ls. The other case, within a day or two of the first one, occurred in Melbourne, and the motorist was fined £lO, with one guinea costs, and ins license was cancelled. These two punishments show that at last, the slow, solemn _ majesty ot the law is waking out of its torpor in regard to the drinking driver. If booze is good medicine (which it is not), it’s darn unhealthy for a motorist to have a skinful when he meets a traffic cop. We suppose the liquor sellers can explain all this satisfactorily to their adherents. We’d say that it is likely to become more and more unhealthy when

the rest of our magistrates snap out of their stupor. For these two examples ‘ Grit’s Clown, on behalf of a huge mass of motor drivers and humble _ pedestrians who are more or less inarticulate, sincerely thanks the presiding magistrates, and he hopes they, will be long spared to hand out the sentence which is really deterrent. Fifteen pounds in one solemn smack takes a bit of laughing off, and it might start a mental process in the dull little brains of the drinking driver which will react in favour of all folks who are compelled to use our roads. It might in time even cause a favourable reaction in the ghastly motor death roll of this bright land. —‘ Grit,’ Sydney. LIFE INSURANCE LOOKS AT LIQUOR. The Forty-fourth Annual Convention of the Life Insurance Medical Directors of America met recently in the Royal York Hotel, Toronto. In one of the addresses given the speaker declared: “ Several of the large companies show a tendency to be more liberal ‘when there has been immoderate use of alcohol a few times a year and to be distinctly more severe when there has been such a use occurring as often as once a month. Companies are averse to insuring anyone who becomes intoxicated two or three times 'a month or who goes on protracted sprees, even though these occur seldom. Their position is no doubt based on the fact that alcohol is a poison and that the human system may recover from poisoning if it has not been too severe, and may recuperate and regain health if the attacks are infrequent. The presence, however, oi poison in the human system from any cause, even though it be mild, if it is constant or even frequent, is bound to deteriorate health and will ultimately lead to disease. The attitude of life insurance companies to* liquor is further illustrated by the fact that when 3.2 beer became legal in the United States on April 6 last, the Home Life Insurance Company issued a circular to its agencies effective April 14, in which it stated: “ With the legalisation of beer many breweries in various sections of the country are now in full operation. The purpose of this letter is to inform you of our attitude toward people connected with this industry. “ The Manufacture of Beer. The following schedule of rates lias . been adopted for brewery employees and for wholsale distributors. It should be born in mind, however, that these rates apply only to people who, outside their occuaption, appear to be first class risks for insurance. “ Proprietors, Superintendents, Managers, Clerks, and Chemists, special consideration hut not preferred. “ Salesmen and Collectors, Extra Premium 5dol; Drivers and Truckmen, Extra Premium 7.50d01; Labourers, Extra Premium 7.50d01; All other employees, Extra Premium sdol. “Retail Distribution of Beer. \\e arc not prepared as yet to announce our ratings for people who sell beer at retail. Our treatment must necessarily depend to a large degree upon

the regulations established in the vari* ous States and the method used to enforce them. “ Waiters and countermen in hotels, restaurants and clubs, which handle beer will no longer qualify for stand* ard insurance. Managers and proprietors will be judged on the merits of each individual case. . . Another letter will be forwarded outlining a definite schedule of rates.” . Beer can bamboozle the thoughtless but it gets a set-back every time it comes under the light of scientific investigation.—The ‘ Temperance Advocate.’