Monday, 4 March 2019

Reply to a temperance twat

Another newspaper extract filed under Temperance Twats. Though this time its's a response to terperance twaddle rather than the temperamce twaddle itself.

It was a rection to a temperance twat going on about "wasting food" gain. Not recognising the food value of beer was a typical temperance trick. It's obviously total bollocks, as anyone lucky enough to boast a beer gut will attest.

It's in the form of two letters to the editor reacyting to a twattish motion passed by local Methodists.

"BEER AND RATIONING
Reply to Councillor Halfpenny and Lichfield Methodists
To the Editor of the "Mercury"
Sir,—In your edition of Friday, September 12th 1941, a resolution was unanimously passed by the Methodists' September meeting calling the attention of the Government to the "wasting of food for alcoholic drink." This resolution was moved by Councillor Halfpenny. May I, with all the respect at my command, address thsse observations to Mr. Halfpenny as a member of the Methodist Church and not as a councillor.

I am sorry, Mr. Halfpenny, that you did not give some careful thought to the statement you gave and published in the Press. Men of thought and experience read the "Lichfield Mercury," and as a citizen of Lichneid and an ex-Service man of 1914-18 and 1939-41, I must reply to you. or. If I failed to do so the "very stones would cry out." Your resolution is very vague and covers a wide field; the point I wish to raise  with you is mainly the production of beer.

You say that land suitable for growing cereals and fruit is used for hops. Have you ever thought, or even inquired, if hops were not grown in Kent, what could be grown? Each county in Great Britain is suitable for various crops, viz.: Lincolnshire, carrots snd potatoes; Worcester, apples and plums; Devon, cider apples; Scotland, rye and barley. Grapes willl not grow in the Highlands, nor figs in Scandinavia. So what would you grow in Kent?

The Minister of Food has arranged that an extra quota of beer be allowed to ail industrial workers and in a lot of cases an extension of hours is allowed to that workers coming off evening shifts can have their pint of beer.

The Cabinet is unanimous in agreeing to maintain the output of beer for the workers. Surely, Mr. Halfpenny, you do not propose short-circuiting the brains and wisdom of the Cabinet by your superseding doctrine.

You say Parliament has imposed on us many restrictions and caused us to alter many well-established and cherished habits; then why are you pressing for the rationing of beer? Can you substantiate your statement that we are "wasting food for alcoholic drink"? Can you give the amount of sugar used in all breweries? Are you SURE sugar is used? is there not an acute shortage of the famous by-product from alcohol known as vinegar, and other by-products? How many tons of fertilisers are produced by the breweries? These long-shot statements are all very nice for the prople who do not think, you can't fool ail the people all the time.

Now, Mr. Halfpenny, I come to the last part of your resolution. A systematic poll taken of the population (including children) showed that 50 per cent, were abstainers. Mr. Halfpenny! Where was this poll taken? Who was the governing authority? Who were the presiding officers? Does your statement represent true figures, or was this poll taken at a Methodist Sunday school? If so, 50 per cent is very high. My dear Mr. Halfpenny, don't you think that a statement about an imaginary poll is very misleading and mischievous? Is it not bordering on careless talk (Emergency Powers Act)? Is it not almost equal to the present procedure of the Nazis? No — please give official figures in future.

Would a party of yours, say twenty men, change places with our steel workers, miners, munition workers or agricultural workers, and keep up their weekly, monthly and yearly output; on a pint or two of tea? I think not. So please refrain from calling a pull from a pewter, "Britain's bulwark," a luxury.
S. H. GISBY.
9, Shortbutts Lane,
Lichfield Mercury - Friday 19 September 1941, page 7. Lichfield."

To be fair, the writer of the letter was wrong about the use of sugar in brewing. It was most certainly used aall through the war, though the percentage was lower than it had been in peacetime.But the poll saying 50% of people were total abstainers is clearly total bollocks. I'd be surprised if it had been more than 10%.

The second letter makes a very valid point about the amount of income beer generated for the government.

"BEER AND TAXATION
To the Editor of the "Mercury"

Sir,—After reading the report of the quarterly meeting of the Methodists held at Lichfield last week, we begin to
wonder why some of these gentry do not take some work of national importance instead of wasting their time talking such drivel.

Firstly, the Government realises that from the brewing industry they find one of their best sources of income. The tax paid on beer (nearly sixpence on every pint) is returnable with a fat interest, as is War Loan. Si every beer-drinker is contributing directly to the war effort with every pint he drinks.

Secondly, every person who is unfortunate enough to have to soil his hands with manual labour realises that the energy used up by such work is in a measure replaced by the feeding value of beer.

Then, of course, the brewing industry and its dependent trades is the source of livelihood to a big section of the populace. But to deprive people of their means of subsistence is perhaps a duty of the Methodist Church, because you have to remember that there is still a very big percentage of unemployed in the country.

The Government very rightly has turned a deaf ear to the vapourings of such people, who pounce on a national emergency to try and enforce their views on a bigger percentage of the population than what they represent
ONE OF THE TRADE.
Lichfield.
September 16th, 1941"
Lichfield Mercury - Friday 19 September 1941, page 7.
In 1941, the yield from beer tax was £133,450,205. By 1945 it was £278,876,870. Money the Government could ill-afford to lose during wartime. Using tax on beer to fince war is an old tradition in the UK, going all the way back to the English Civil War.

2 comments:

qq said...

Even more comical than the idea that mid-20th-century brewers weren't using sugar is the suggestion that the Garden of England might be left bereft of crops if hops weren't grown. Twattishness begets twattishness.

In fact there's quite a good argument that hops are a labour-intensive crop that produce little food value for humans, and that production should have been dialled down to the bare minimum needed for bittering for preservative purposes for the duration of the war.

Drink mild for victory!

Ron Pattinson said...

qq,

in WW I they dug up some of the hops for that very reason and replaced them with food crops.