Aug. 19. "Mose ratepayers will welcome the Council's reply to Dr. Rawlinson in this week's Municipal Gazette that the correspondence on this subject (the suppression of certain houses) has now reached a stage when, in the members' opinion, its further protraction can serve no useful purpose.'' The correspondence in question dates from March 24 last when the Moral Welfare League took exception to a re-. mark by the Commissioner of Police, in the annual report, to the effect that the suppression of these houses had merely. resulted in scattering their inmates over a wider area with decreased possibility of police control. The Moral Welfare League immediately wrote to the Council to ask for an explanation of this statement, which, after all, is a matter of common every-day observation, and a lengthy correspondetice ensued. Much of it strikes one as mere controversy for controversy's sake, but Dr. Rawlinson's letter of July 22 is important as it shows plainly the ultimate aim of the M.W.L.
He attempts to entrap the Council into an udmission- that two unfortunates practising their calling - under the same roof constitute a house which must either be licensed or suppressed and if two (we may anticipate the question) why not one? And thus, under the resolution of the Ratepayers' Meeting of 1920, the Council would be committed to expelling all these women from the Settlement.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.