, 1915-07-31

Had the Rev. Gentleman mude himself
familiar with the question before he under
took to write his derogatory article he would
have discovered an important fact, from the
report of the St. Croix Savings Bunk that
the balance of deposits was SIS, 1918 the
greater pnrt of which amount belongs TO
poor people, also the Nat onal Bank with no
less thnn 10000 savings bank books, the
aggregate amount of these must be con
siderable, with such glazing facts, is Rev.
Fsber justified in his endrayour to make
them worthless?
Rev. Fub"r claims that his conclusion,
that drinking is much worse here than III
Denmark ls logically correct.
This would be So if his premises thai the
poor man spends Of his earnings in drink
anil III food were correct but since he is
able 10 save even so little though it may be,
as proved by my above statement, it follows
TINT his prem,se are incorrect and his
conclusion utterly DESTROYED. This is also
sound logic aud not that OF q |fanntlcal
ab0ljtionist.
Rev. Fnber says TINT the poor IN IN out here
drinks 2 gallons of pure alcohol per persona,
without stating the time limlt-a skilltul state
ment Of his. -Gmutiug that he means this
amount per aunum, statistics provo that
the poor man drinks about two gultons Of
. U|t BGt iiIAti3 Nht 10 ANi4 - N'tt t4C
half strength Of alcohol, it follows that
the consumption per persona IS only one
gallon Of alcohol per nnnum, consequently
from his own admissions, cess hdn IN Dem
mark By one half the aotou.t.
| find Rev. Fnber quoting Rev. Lawaetz's
experience OF fifteen yenrs ago on the rum
question, but carefully avoiding his own
experience of the present day.
Granting Rev. Lnwaetz's experience to
have been correct ut the time, can Rev.
Fnber to-day assert from his own experience
in spite of the facts presented hIn. hat
conditions are the same nnl call for bis
propaganda against drunk messy The an
swer is but too self evident to all ncquuin-
ted with the matter.
Although he asserts that the giving of
land to the poor man is the only salvation
for St. Croix, yet, reading between the
lines Of his article, it wooI seem that he
is not strongly IN favour Of such a move
ment, since he claims that the drink queS-
ton must first be solved. by this it is evi-
deut thut be means lhpt the poor mem il
too much addicted to drink to become u
successful lnuIeI proprietor.
No man having the least spark Of patriot
ism within hnn and possessing sufficient
moral courage can calmly stand hy and wit
UtNA Nlt Nll0 bt'dN lAN7 uIVh us M lFO
Lpnd without ut least saving u VOID N pro-
test, and to this end [ hive refuted the
statement of conditions as asserted in Rev.
Fabet's article in West End News Of the
ooh inst. | have IN spite OF nI attempts
and trlals fniled to find the prevail
ing state Of drunkenness in ST. Croix as de-
plored by the aiyoctt of temperance, OF
rather The ab ltionisls. Neither toIice nor
Hospital statistics prove that such Il state
prevails.
Whcpce then do The abol,tionists receive
their information; upon what do they bpse
their as,ettIons? Rev. Fabor triamphnn.ly
states thpt the peope here nre poorer than
the people of Denmrk. He ought to be
ashamed to openly assert this. Whose is the
fault? Was there not II time when the poo
Pile of Denmark were also very poo He as
a University student and sou Of the SOIL must
better know the history of his country than
l, a son by adoption. What is it that has
uplifled lhetn TO their present statu>? Small
proprietorShrp, winch - just what. we to-day
are seeking and which Rev. Fnber and bis
predecessors us we'll AS every right thinking
Daue should long ere nov have helped us
TO Acquire.
Chnstinusted, 26th july, 1915.