ANOTHER GREAT AUTHORITY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1277, 4 November 1911, Page 6

ANOTHER GREAT AUTHORITY.

THE " OUTLOOK " ON PROHIBITION. MR. ROOSEVELT AND DR. ABBOTT. There is no organ of thought better edited or more influential than the "Outlook," of which the Ucv. Dr. Lyman Abbott is editor, ' and ex-President Roosevelt his associate. Wo all know Roosevelt, and Dr. Abbott was successor to Henry Ward Beecher, the eminent divine and pastor of Plymouth Church. Tho "Outlook" dictum on any subject is accepted as authoritative by the larger part of tho intelligent and reading public mainly bocauso tho reverend doctor who edits it stands for calm and reasonable thought. Dr. Lyman Abbott, both as preacher and writer, is a man of absolute sincerity, and ho enunciates without fear or favour his liberal and enlightened conclusions.

Iu the "Outlook" of the sth September Dr. Abbott deals with Prohibition. As tho subject is of great interest at the present moment, it is well to produce evidence to .show tint the higher type of clergymen, men of world-wide reputation, men of undoubted honour and integrity, men of deep-soated religious convictions, men who truly love temperance and would give their lives to see all men as they are, "moderate-in all things,''' are- utterly opposed, conscientiously and honestly opposed, to Prohibition, and these famous men 6tand in striking contrast to the nambypamby persons who, having littlo intelligence and less experience, set themselves up to dictate to their betters that tho world shall be remade, with Nature and revealed truth left out. Thcso people think that only good people support Prohibition and only the vicious aro opposing it. This is tho attitude of tho Pharisee.

Dr. Abbott agrees with this view also, and then proceeds to deal further, editorially, with this question, as follows: —

"We do not believe in State-wide Prohibition. In fact, no one of the States that have adopted prohibitory laws has, as far as we know, really adopted Prohibition. . What most States have done has been to issue an edict against tho sale of liquor, and then leave each locality to carry that edict into effect. This is practically tho worst kind of local option—local option to disregard tho law.

Tho samo thing; happens in New Zealand. No-License is carried in one electorate, and those who want liquor bring it in from another doctorate, and an illicit trade is established for tho service of thoso who cannot buy in quantities, and tho illict traders keep drunkenness under cover lest suspicion should bo aroused as to.the success of the prohibitory law; but tho consumption of liquor goes on all the same, and the law is ultimately utterly disregarded. Dr. Abbott continues: "Wo sympathise with tho Prohibitionists in tlieir passionato desire, to find a panacea. Tho argument lor tho panacea which they_ propose is very simple—the liquor traffic, they argue, produces thoso ovils; prohibit tho liquor traffic, and you abolish the evils. It is as simple as was tho argument of the Abolitionists in the '50's: slavery is a crime; therefore we demand tho immediate and unconditional abolition of slavery. Or as the argument of the communists: private property produces covetousness, industrial oppression, frauds, robberies, gambling; therefore abolish private property. "The object of prohibitory Jaws is to prevent wrong-doing. All civilised communities prohibit murder, because murder is always wrong; but they do not prohibit tho sale of fircarms : which may lead to murder, because the use of firearms is not always wrong. Tho real analogy is not between murder and tho sale of liquor; tho real analogy is between murder and intemperance, What society should do is to attempt to eradicate intemperance, for intemperance is always wrong; not to try to prevent all sale of liquor, for tho uso of liquor is not necessarily always wrong. Tho radical, and tho oniy radical, remedy for intemperance is making men temperate—that is, endowing (hem with the power of selfcontrol. Law can never bo a substitute for this work of education and religion." Yet Prohibition clergymen in New Zealand are abandoning their work of education and religion for (he purpose of instituting law. Dr. Abbott concludes his condemnation of Prohibition in this way:

".Men who nro as earnestly interested in the temperance cause as the Prohibitionists object to Prohibition becauso it professes to do what it cannot do; because it professes to prohibit when it docs not prohibit; because experience has demonstrated (lint one part of a State which believes in Prohibition cannot, and does not, prevent the liquor traffic in another part of the State which does not bclievo in Prohibition." When (he people of New Zealand como to record (heir votes on election day they will say (he world's best and greatest are not Prohibitionists, so wo must keep liquor under licensed control and voto Continuance, and against Prohibition, by striking out both bottom lines on the ballot paper.*