BISHOP JULIUS AND WORKING MEN'S CLUBS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CI, Issue 11898, 23 May 1899, Page 6

BISHOP JULIUS AND WORKING MEN'S CLUBS.

TO THE 'EDITOR. Sir,—ln the correspondence that passed between the President of the Christchurch Working Men's Club and Bishop Julius, the former waxed virtuously indignant at the idea of the Bishop attacking the clubs on what he terms " mere hearsay evidence, and suggests that the " evil example of the prohibitioni* agitator "—" the baser sort/ as lie elegantly names" them—has been--lot-lowed.. The statement that particularly troubled. Mr J. M. Thompson, the president, was " that one, had only to look into .the working men's clubs, etc., to see how much intemperance existed." The Bishop, in the latter clause of his reply to the President, submits his opinion " that all clubs should come under the operation of the Licensing Act, if he believed the half, of what ho about the local.one." Now, as a private citizen, I claim that there is ample evidence to justify 'Bishop Julius's view of the matter. We need only to review the annual reports of these institutions to convince any fair-minded person that these clubs are practically co-operative grogshops, with a few more side shows than usually pertain to the average drink shop. This is my opinion, and I claim to have a solid foundation to support it in the fact that in all the annual balance-sheets of these clubs I have seen, the liquor account far surpasses all other items so disproportionately, that one is forced to'the conclusion that, if all the clubs are not brought within the scope of the Licensing Act when " no license " is carried, there will be a large and profitable influx of bibulous persons into the ranks of the clubs, in order to escape the provisions of the law. The following extracts from copies of bal-ance-sheets of various working men's clubs throughout the colony indicate that Mr .Thompson's personal abstinence is an extraordinary exception to the rule, and that the facilities in these institutions for undue drinking, if not drunkenness, are far greater than they should be, and also show the enormous and significant disparity between the amounts expended on liquor and literature in these Working Men's Clubs and Mutual Societies of Art: Sydenham and Addington Club—lß92-3 : Liquor sold, £800; literature bought, £9 15s ,4d. Year ending 1897: Bar expenditure; £1445 6s'-9d;- literature, £25 16s lOd. Napier Working Men's Club—Year endin" September, 1896: Bar, £5828 14s 2dr lib ? raryi.£i32 i lßs. : ? " ! " Ashburton Working Men s Club—Year ending March 31,1895.;.Bar receipts, £1627 13s 6d ; literature bought,. £35 Is 4d., .bame club for year ending 1896 : Bar expenditure, £2207 7s 9d; book £24 Is 6d; billiards, £129 7s 6d. The Blenheim Club for year 1894—Liquor, £825 3s 9d ; library, 10s. WeHmaton Working Men's Club (from haltyearly report ending Dec. 31, 1895)—Liquor, £2483 19s 2d; library, £ll 4s 6d. Petone Working Men's Club—August, 1895-1896: Bar receipts, £1053 12s Id; book expenditure, £lol7s Bd. As the above are fair samples of the rest of the clubs, surely Mr Thompson cannot deny that they prove an undue amount ot drinking in those places. Is the President of the Christchurch Club game enough to publish his club's last balance-sheet?—l am, etc., ARGIIS -