[To THE EDITOR or THE "Sparraroa."] SIR,—Although a reader of
the Spectator for many years, I have never before trespassed in your columns. But your repeated and lengthy personal attacks on the Cadburys and Rowntrees have irritated me into writing. The defence of these gentlemen is so obvious and complete that I presume they do not think it worth mentioning. That there is at present a demand for papers with betting tips, which will infallibly be met by someone, is proved by the fact that such papers as the Star would not be bought without them ; the people concerned would simply transfer their patronage. Therefore the Cadburys and Rowntrees decide to supply a Star that is, outside its betting tips, as innocuous as may be.
Other reformers, including bishops, noblemen, and others, keep public-houses—by deputy—in order to make them as decent as may be, knowing well all the time that they are supplying drink for the destruction of habitual tipplers. If 1 am not mistaken, Sir, you have praised these reformers. Sinners they are undoubtedly, but they have a. defence, to my mind, sufficient for this imperfect world; they hope to do more good than harm.
There is an old, almost forgotten injunction that covers the case of all these offenders—bishops, Cadburys, noblemen, and Rowntrees. Ordinary people like myself have no compunction in hiding behind it and letting well-meaning reformers go their way. I am surprised, Sir, that it has not occurred to you; it is : Judge not.—I am, Sir, &e., ONLOOKER.
[Our correspondent's contention would be sound if the members of the Cadbury and Rowntree families concerned considered betting to be like moderate drinking, and also if in the Trust public-houses vehement incentives to drinking were allowed. As to the manner in which Mr. George Cadbury regards betting we would ask " Onlooker " to read the letter which precedes this. The interview with Mr. Cadbury knocks on the head his sophistical apology for the two voices in which the Cadburys speak to their fellow-countrymen.—ED. Spectator.]