NO-LICENSE MEETING.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6647, 20 November 1899, Page 4

NO-LICENSE MEETING.

- ■ _> — _ - The second of a series of Sunday evening prohibition meetings was held at the Opera House last night, the Rev H. C. M. Watson in the chair. The Chairman said that the No-license movement was essentially a moral and religious one. He referred to the newspaper column, headed Prohibition Fallacies, which contained really the fallacies of someone else. He combatted the statements in that column that prohibition increased drunkenness, or that human life was shortened by abstinence. (Applause). He eulogised tho address which md been forwarded to the men and women of Christchurch, and referred to it as a work of which they would never be ashamed. The appeal was an essentially religious one. Several influential men had met bim in the street, and informed him that though they enjoyed their glass of beer, they would vote No license for tho sake of others. He quoted tlie returns of the General Provident Insurance Society, established in 1844, to show that the average life of the total abstainer was worth 26 per cent more than tbe life of the sober man who took alcohol in strict moderation. He quoted from the returns of the RegistrarGeneral of England, which showed the mortality per thousand among different callings to bs as follows : — Priests and clergymen, 44 ; barristers and lawyers, 7£ ; brewers, 13 ; inn-keepers, 18 ; and hotel servants, 22£. After quoting other authorities on the same subject, Mr Watson asked them to strike out the top line at the next meeting. (Applause.) The Rev Dr Erwin said that the arguments on both sides of tho question had been fully advanced. But the time for argnment had passed, and the time for action had come. The liquor trade was fighting for its very existence, and if Satan was not fighting for his skin he was fighting for the skin of a well-beloved child. (Applause.) His side appealed not only to. self-preservation, but to tbe desire to benefit others. He urged them, on all accounts, to strike down a; trade which was bearing people to ' hell. The trade differed from all others which meant an increase in the wealth of the community, but this trade disseminated poverty, disease and crime. Notwithstanding that the law had restricted the trade in all directions, it had grown and thriven. The matter was now in the hands of the people, and if they did not put it down he feared the devil would have a long innings in this community. He asked theni, before God and man, to consider if they couM so vote as to put temptation in the way of their brothers and sisters. Hell itself would be jubilant when it saw that the advocates qf the liquor traffic claimed to be the apostles of freedom. If, as the result of continuance, the State wonld have to lose the intelligence and thrift of thousands, the State had as much right to protect itself as the citizen liad to protect himself from the thief who would steal his purse. They had a weapon placed in their hands, viz., their vote at the forthcoming local option poll. Let them strike, and might the blessing of God rest on their efforts. In Great Britain £70,000,000 had been spent on drink by the working classes, and he asked them to judge how far tliat fact affected the poverty of the people. Earl Shaftesbury had said that it was impossible permanently to relieve poverty until they got rid of the curse of drink* and Charles Booth had stated that drink was the most prolific cause of poverty. He urged them again to strike out the top line. (Applause.) Miss Roberts said that in canvassing for No license votes the had frequently been met with the objection that a great deal of employment would be done away with. She cited a suppositious case of a bad disease amongst children which was suffered to run on because the doctors, chemists and undertakes would lose work thereby. Of course, no community would allow such a state of things for a moment, and they might well be sure that were the drink traffic done away with the money therein invested would provide employment for thousands who were at present earning nothing. She contended that the non-drinkers, not the drinkers, gave all the employment, and she would gladly see all the money spent in drink cast into the sea. (Applause). A sum of £14,000,000 was invested in Gumes3's BTewerv in Dublin, which employed" 3000 men, while the linen manufactories in Belfast, with tho same investment of capital, employed 100,000. The brewing interests in New Zealand, with a capital of £267,000, employed only 560 men, while the clothing and boot factories, with a capital of £160,000, employed 4467. For the sake of thoso who were "suffering, they had to say to others, "Thou shalt not drink." (Applause). She asked those present not only to vote, but to influence votes, and to keep their guns firing right up to the election. (Applause). She was confident that tbe day was soon coming when every liquor shop in New Zealand wpuld be shut. (Applause),