THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16566, 2 June 1914, Page 4

THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, Someone signing himself “ Churchman ” lias attempted to answer my letter on “The Bishop and the Liquor Question.” 1 say “attempted” advisedly, because, after nil his generalisations, ho has failed to notice the main point, that is, that the Pope has signified his interest in and approval of “temperance” or “anti-alcohol" societies, fn this connection “ temperance” and “anti-alcohol” must be synonymous terms, as all temperance societies arc anti-alcohol societies. Com- , mon usago has in this matter concen--1 tinted the .significance of the word “temperance,” so that temperance societies are never understood to be for the promotion of moderate drinking, s,nt always for total abstinence ;in fact, are anti-alcoholic. Temperance, pledges are never rum and water pledges, but •without exception teetotal. Temperance drinks are never diluted alcohol, and “Churchman” should know this and not quibble at the point. The term became connected with the anti-alcohol movement in its infancy. In its inexperience it was considered that abstinence from the stronger drinks, spirits, was all that was necessary for the members, and the more moderate or temperate malted beverages were permitted. The earliest pledges ran accordingly. But it was soon found that all alcoholic beverages had the same sad results in the end, and a complete break had to be made with them all. But tho name temperance clung. “Churchman” cannot deny tho indefiniteness of the term as ho uses it; neither can he deny the fearful danger of growing appetite, which perpetually overhangs the man or woman who drinks in moderationNeither can ho deny, in face of the declarations of the eminent med cal investigators, tho harm fulness of even socalkd moderate indulgence in alcoholic liquors. Instead he battles valiantly against a minor orror in English which in no way obscured my meaning. “Virtue cannot bo imparted by law,” but vice can bo encouraged by law. “ All high-minded and pure-minded clergymen ” is indeed a full-sounding phrase that might possibly beguile tho ignorant and unthinking; but it is devoid of truth. Would “Churchman” hold that the Pope is not “ high-mind-ed and pure-souled,” or that Bishop Julius and Bishop Averill, and the great body of Anglican clergy, the Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and Church of Christ ministers and pastors, and Salvation Army officers in this and other countries aro, on the contrary, low-minded and impure souled? Such is very evidently his suggestion, for these have declared in_ favour of the movement he opposes. Unless “ Churchman ” should choose to enlighten us, we cannot know what right ho has to claim his honourable nom-de-plume; but to me it is a matter of much regret that it should be used in defending a colossal evil. The letter over it is in active support of tho present conditions of liquor license law, which have permitted tho promotion of unparalleled degradation and suffering. “Churchman” may do his level best to side-track the subject of debate, but the intel’igent, open-minded men and women of all denominations and none knew too well the bitter fruit of the liquor traffic to allow such efforts to influence them in judging and condemning a cursed trade.—T am, etc., JAMES THOMPSON.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —"Prohibitionist"’’ deceives himself when ho says your correspondents who are opposed to prohibition and in. favour of licensing and temperance are trying to gull the public by saying prohibition is responsible for the increasing drink bill. As far as 1 am concerned, 1 can see that your correspondents have opposed prohibition because the mote it spreads by nolicense thfe greater grows the drink bill of the whole dominion. This proves that the growth of prohibition has no temperance effect. Moreover, the scenes of crime and wickedness taking place in no-license areas in connection with drinking are unequalled and unparalleled in any licensing area, demonstrating that no-liconso and prohibition are worthless as temperance reforms. I do not argue for the trade; I contend for the right of every citizen, male or female, to maintain the right to drink alcoholic beverages, irrespective whether the majority ot voters is one way or the other. " Prohibitionist ” says Amentia is out to try "prohibition” as a remedy for the so-called evils of the licensing system. Like Mr Wesley Spragg, lie says "the dry areas are fast covering” the map of the United States. America is really undergoing the same experience as Now Zealand, and " I rohibition ” invites us to compare America to-day and ten years ago m relation to "prohibition” and drink consumption. AA'e will do better for "Prohibitionist” than that. A writer in the " American Review of Reviews.” a paper favourable to the prohibition view, says that in 1910 the United States, with one-half the population under “prohibition,” consumed 1.851.000.000 gallons of beer and 133,000,000 gallons of distilled liquors. Of all nationalities, America stands first for beer consumption and second in whisky consumption. Yet forty-seven millions of her ninety-threo millions people are under "prohibition, and ten vearr, ago, with less " prohibition, the people of’the United States drank less beer and whisky per head than they do to-day with more prolubiThis may not prove that prohibition pi emotes drinking, but it does demonstrate that prohibition has no beneficial effects upon the drinking propensity of the people. If total abstinence is a virtue it must have its source within the humans. That is where prohibition fails. There it proves itself a sham. In New Zealand the same is our experience. With twelve areas dry we are consuming more beer, wine and whisky in the aggregate than we did before prohibition began to be triumphant. With one area ' dry. and 98,000 voting for "no-license in 1890. our drink hill was £2,265.900. In 1911, with 231,000 voting ‘prohibition,” the drink bill for that year was £3.982.162. an increase of 136,000 in "prohibition” and an increase of £1,71.7.162 in the drink hill. Prohibition is utterly useless, and prohibitionists arc deluding themselves and others in thinking otherwise. " Prohibition-i-t” says, "Teach the people who drink too much to withstand temptation.” Exactly. That is the tiling to do; but when did prohibitionists institute a temperance crusade? They have abandoned temperance warfare for political agitation, and the power of a law that is laughed at. . It is here they have failed, and it is because of tins that the. more thoughtful and intelligent. men and women of the community have severed themselves from the prohibitionists’ ranks.—l am, etc., TEMPERANCE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir.—“ Churchman ” evidently collects his argument's from the letters so freely contributed by the “Trade” to our newspapers signed “Abstainer” and “ Modcrnte.” He wants ns to believe that prohibition is responsible for the increase in divorce, and that

it breeds insanity, crime and pauperism. He says this has been proved. Mho proved it? Because ho signs liiinsolf " Churchman ” does he expect us to accept his unsupported testimony? \ our issue of this date shows the iccords of a number of petitions for dnorce. " Churchman ’ can there read the part that drunkenness las played in his own district. But be is not looking for facts that are opposed to his theory. Will " Clmrclim.'in, Moderate,” and Co. please explain why the prohibition area has increased here and in America. Are the people blind or fools? 11 "Churchman s ” statements were correct, and prohibition proved so disastrous to a community, the movement ..’ould have, died a natural death. AYe are aware that there are some abuses, hut the real good accomplished far outweighs those, and when a district gives it a fair chance the benefits are so great that other districts agitate, for it. The movement is growing. That growth is not confined to New Zealand, and this fact alone proves " Churchman ” to lie wrong.

]' rom the ranks of the moderate drinkers drunkards are constantly being recruited. A drunkard is a disgusting object, and often a danger to .society so wo are trying to prevent drunkenness by compelling moderates to abstain for the sake of their weaker brothers. It is perfectly justifiable to do so, just as we can compel a healthy man to get vaccinated to guard against smallpox. Yet the drink plague is worse than smallpox, and ‘■Churchman” denies our right to legislate against it. I shall hope to see a letter again from "Churchman ” giving us proof of his statements and explaining how in face of them " prohibition ” is growing so rapidly.—l am, etc., PROHIBITIONIST.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In pushing forward to assist a noble cause, one must ever bo prepared to receive a lew missiles from these craven moonlighters who, ashamed to follow their own banner, hurl personalities at random from the shelter of a nom-de-plume. If the " wakened wit and kindled learning” of your correspondent " Sensible ” may be taken as a fair sample from the “great men” of the liquor party, then wo can only pity their inferiors whoso faculties are but normal. By selecting portions of my former letter and a few of the old, disproved and threndbaro arguments of his party, bo endeavours to frame a reply. Throughout his letter there is but one original phrasA "Strong drink,” he says, "subdues, pacifies and comforts.” Quite right, “ Sensible.” That explains the frequency of drunken fights. The combatants merely desire to “subdue and pacify” each other, after adding their earnings to the comforts of the liquor party. But, surely it is a reflection upon the “ wit au<l learning ” of “ Sensible ” to endeavour to parade mo in the repulsive uniform which he, ns champion of an evil, will only wear beneath tho cloak of an assumed name? Fortunately I can afford to smile at the insinuation that I am a victim of the drink habit, to which the best reply is my life of total abstinence.

AYhat a’pity for "Sensible” that, in searching for fresh excuses for a depravity, he falls hack into the old quagmire of juggled figures, and, finally, in sheer desperation, is forced to borrow "wit and learning” from other advocates of strong drink! AA T hen' " Sensible ” is man enough to come into the open, when ho is capable of substituting originality for the personalities with which he endeavours to degrade me, then, and then alone, will he command a hearing, and by discarding secrecy , lie will cease to bo another of those"very bad advertisements for that vile trade with which ho is associated. —I am, etc., OLIA’EIt HUNTER. Church Bay, May 27.