p. 8 | OUR LONDON LETTER by M. Ellsworth Olsen

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Apr 1, 1903

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 29, No. 13.

OUR LONDON LETTER.

By M. Ellsworth Olsen

[From our own correspondent.]

Progress in Temperance Legislation—Temperance Compromises—The Nation’s Peril—Woful Statistics—Military Matters.

THE temperance problem has been receiving rather more attention than usual during the last few weeks. As a matter of fact, drunkenness has become such a serious nuisance, especially as regards its recent inroads upon the country’s womanhood, that even moderate drinkers are quite willing that it should be a subject for restrictive legislation. Probably some of my readers will remember the child messenger act, which has now been in force for about a year. Before that time it was customary to send little children to the public houses (saloons) with tin pails, bottles, or pitchers to fetch the alcoholic drinks for family use. Naturally many children fell into the habit of imbibing a portion on the way. Then the parents complained of short measure. So it was more satisfactory all around when this practise was stopped by law.

With the beginning of the present year, a new licensing act has come into force, forbidding the sale of strong drink to habitual drunkards. A man or woman arrested three times for drunkenness, has himself or herself entered in the so-called black-list, and no publican can supply such persons with any drink for three years under pain of losing his license. Infractions of this law are punishable by heavy fines, so that it will be a very difficult thing for the habitual drunkard to satisfy his appetite for drink. Already good results of the measure are appearing. Another great boon to the temperance cause has been a court decision upholding the right of a magistrate to refuse to renew the license of a public house if in his opinion it is superfluous, i. e., is located in a neighborhood in which the public houses are more numerous than the needs of the public require. Emboldened by this decision magistrates are quite generally refusing to renew licenses where the number of public houses seems excessive, and of course the effects of such restriction are good.

Quite recently a new form of temperance has come to the front. It consists in pledging oneself to use no intoxicating liquors except in connection with the two principal meals of the day. Rev. F. S. Webster started the movement by the chance suggestion made in a public address that persons who do not see their way clear to sign the teetotal pledge might at least promise not to drink except at meals. The idea caught on with wonderful rapidity. Persons of every class eagerly joined, the newspapers took up the matter, and altogether it bid for a time to become a craze. Printed pledges were called for by thousands, and the little red button to fasten on the coat lapel became a profitable piece of merchandise which shops of all sorts eagerly sought to handle. Lord Roberts, commander-in-chief of the army, has accepted the presidency of the society, and with him are associated, as vice-presidents, other prominent personages. Dr. Robert Hutchison, a high authority on food and dietetics, recently commended the movement in a public lecture. He said that drinking between meals was doubtless a very harmful thing, but the use of a moderate amount of wine or similar alcoholic beverage at meals was not only harmless, but actually beneficial (1). So the movement is on the crest of the wave, and bids fair to become more popular than anything yet brought forward in temperance lines.

However, it is not difficult to find a reason for this. Compromise is usually popular with a large class of people. As already indicated, the drink evil has assumed such serious dimensions that almost everybody admits something must be done to stem the tide if the nation is to be saved. Sir James Crichton-Browne, F.R.S., said recently in a public lecture that the time had come for “an awakening on the subject of physical efficiency.” He said further that there was “evidence of a striking kind that the people of our large towns, at any rate, are physically degenerating.”

The Westminster Review, a magazine of considerable character and importance, remarks in a late number: “It should be common knowledge that cancer, insanity, suicide, and chronic alcoholism have seized us in an iron grip.” In support of this statement, the same magazine gives the following table which, it says, should be “intelligible to the poorest understanding.”

Annual Death-rate to a Million Persons Living in England.

Year	Cancer	Insanity	Suicide	Chronic Alcoholism
1875	470	41	67	27
1898	802	114	92	65

Truly these figures are alarming. The increase of chronic alcoholism is especially unfortunate, as it applies particularly to women, in whose hands the welfare of the race naturally rests to a very large degree. Homes for inebriates have more applications from women than from men, and the number of homes wrecked by a drinking wife and mother is estimated to be large.

These are some of the things that are occupying the minds of thoughtful people on this side the Atlantic. Such persons view the immediate future with real apprehension. It may as well be added, too, that the feeling of distrust and uncertainty as to the political outlook is becoming general. Roughly speaking, about three-fourths of the king’s speech at the recent opening of parliament, had to do with war and national defence. England fears Germany. The foremost newspapers are urging the taking of more active measures to defend the country against invasion.

In short, the situation is exactly that which God’s Word informs us would prevail in the last days. Men’s hearts are “failing them for fear and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth.” M. ELLSWORTH OLSEN.

London, Feb. 27, 1903.