The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1891-09-12
OMEN rO MEMO.
EDITOR BuLLETN:-

August 10Th, suggests the probabili
ty of his having had a serious bilious
attack. Leaving argument entirely
out of the question he INDUCED in
abuse. | do not know who Memo is,
nor do | care to find out. | have
this to say to him, whoever he may
! be, that if he has got to the end of
his clippings and finds himself gray
eled tol lack of natter" he'd better
qGit writing before he gives any more
exhibitions of mud-slinging. I do
not propose to let him escape the
! question at issue, viz: prohibition
and the Liquor Traffic, by bringing
in other issues and avoiding the real
point He processes to feel annoyed
because | didn't answer his articles
at once.
His first article to T. S. S. was on
July 29th. l sent two replies, one
August 9TH, the other August 8th.
He addressed one to me on August
18th; / replied to it as soon as posi-
bic, the reply appearing September
7th, having been delayed several
days by press of matter in the Bull
LETIN.
As to Nemo's remark about "the
public" having "in measure for.
gotten" his articles; he is probably
better Judge than / of how soon
they are likely to'be forgotten.
He then talks learnedly of what |
had written as ''batch of incongru
tiles and dirty lnsinuations spiced
with whining" How easy to answer
in that style! But it won't do, Ne
mo. You haven't even attacked a
single statistic or statement which |
made; until you have done SO and
given proof that | mis- stated the
case, you'd ought to be man enough
to avoid personalities.
| propose to re-state a few of what
you call 'insinuations spiced with
whining" and let the public judge
the matter. stated that your first
quoted article was written with the
evident intention to deceive when it
tried to make out that there were
only %, 900 prohibtiOnists in ONO.
gave you the woe cast in Ohio in
1888 when oZ3, lS9 men voted for
prohibition. You didn't answer a
word.
quoted from your own article and
proved that in Maine, where on test
vote, in 1884, the prohihitionists out
numbered the liquor men three to
one, yet the liquor men furnished one
and third times more criminals than
came from the prohibitionists. In
your own articles you admitted that
Is percent of all the criminals in the
United States used liquor as a bev-
eragP.
You admitted, yourself, that the
business you defend (whiskey trade)
had made in the United States alone
10, 900 criminals. 2l,297 paupers
and GAO insane persons. | quoted
from the Massachusetts Commission
Oh Idiocy the proof that nearly IS
percent of the idiotic children of that
State came from homes where the
parents drank liquor You made no
attempt even to deny it.
You attempted to make out that
what the liquor men paid in licenses,
duties, taxes On the manufacture of
liquor, etc, paid for the keep OF the
men, women and children that it
ruined. You were told that that was
treating men like beasts-to be ruin
ed and then fed at so much per
head. You had nothing to say on
the point.
A liquor paper, The Chicago Cham
pion, was quoted as admitting that
nine murders week were directly
due to the use of whiskey in L. S. in
1890. $50 murders per year in one
country. Memo finds it convenient
to overlook this. It's easier to shout
''prohlbition fanatic" Memo was
reminded that here in Honolulu the
liquor men were responsible for the
death through drink of some OF our
alb est men. They died like beasts,
and were brought to that state by
men who were willing to take this
money for liquor. II Memo will open
his eyes he can see some more men
on our streets getting pretty well
along to the same end-the ditch, or
death by "delirium tremens."
So | might go on, Mr.. Editor,
quoting from the four articles which
| wrote. If Memo is content to de-
fend his cause by calling these facts
''jncongruities" and ''insiEualions"
he is welcome TO do so.
Memo processes great horror at
what he is pleased to call my lack Of
sympathy, etc. for "the poor, dis
graced and starving families of those
10, 900 prohibition sconndreIs !"
| don't suppose that he intended
to deceive the BULLETIN readers but
if he had read my article of Aug. 8,
he would have seen his mistake. 1t
reads as follows: "He" (Nemo) "then
asks what are the prohibltionists do
ing for the remaining $4,000. Easily
answered--helping to support them
and trying to make them into respect
able citizens, What did the liquor
men dot Why made 81 900 How
BY taking the last cent they had in
for drink and when they