ANTI-GAMBLING SOCIETY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 10835, 19 August 1898, Page 3

ANTI-GAMBLING SOCIETY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— was with feelings of great pleasure that I noticed in yesterday's Herald that an Auti-Gauibling 'Society had been started in Wellington, and again this morning I was pleased to see that the House had last night negatived by 36 to 18 a' motion to go into committee on the Restraint of Wagering Bill. The division shows clearly that tho House is adverse to the state of things as at present obtaining at public sports, and all true well-wishers of field sports and athletio games will welcome the introduction of such a measure as the above Bill. There is no reason why a mine should be sprung on clubs in this matter. Racing clubs must have j known that they wero having their day, and having had it they should lie prepared now to stand aside and make room for a new order of things. Mr. Seddon is to be commended very highly for the bold stand he look over the second clause. My only object in writing this letter is to ventilate the subject, and as it is one very far-reaching in its effects and carrying many evils into tho lives and homes of our fellow-colonists, especially amongst our young people, I deem it is the duty of everyone who would lend a hand to purify public sport to try and cut down this upas tree of gambling and betting. If there are half a score of men and women in Auckland who are neither afraid nor ashamed to show their colours in this matter, it would afford me great pleasure to meet with them, at my office, and discuss what steps might lie thought best to be taken, either to co-operate with the Anti-Gambling Society in Wellington, or to form a sister society in this city. I am, etc., George J. Garland. 6. Coombes' Arcade, Queen-street, August 17, 1898. "DRINK AT THE EXHIBITION." TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— warwhoop, signed William James Williams, in this day's Herald, must be accepted by the community at large as a slur on the fair fame of the inhabitants of this city. Such statements cannot appeal to the sympathy of the community, and they feud to stir up animosity in the minds of men against prohibition and its followers. I claim that it would be just as rational to ask I lie committee to prohibit the salo of ico cream, tea, and soft drinks generally; in fact, after reading the report of experts, lately published in the London papers, I question whether a glass of ice cream would not do more peimanent harm to the consumer than a glass of alcohol. As to tea, we can see the bad effects produced on consumers of the much-consumed concoction who partake to excess. I therefore respectfully suggest that the committee consider the advisability of prohibiting the sale of any of the abovementioned articles.—l am, etc., Boswell.