The Hastings Standard Published Daily. TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 1897. CLERICAL IMPUDENCE.

Hastings Standard, Issue 284, 30 March 1897, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily.

TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 1897. CLERICAL IMPUDENCE.

For the cause that lacks assistance,! For the wrongs that need resistance, For the future in the distance. And the good that we can do.

The Rev. John Hosking, a name which wo think will strike out readers as being familiar, and, from its great familiarity, not held in the same high estimation as would otherwise be the cose, for strange enough there is a cross-grained proverb which says, "familiarity breeds contompt." We do not for one moment wish to suggest that the Rev. John Hosking is generally held in contempt; on the contrary, wo believe he has many friends and admirers in the district, and amongst the latter we number ourselves. We admire the reverend doctor not merely for the fanaticism he displays in connection with that brain-reeling subject Prohibition, but also for Uie coolness with which, in the puemiit of a delusion, he bumps his clerical head against sundry brick-walls. The chemical analysis of Prohibition seems to be water, and the reverend gentleman, like the ordinary taproom lounger, appears to have soaked himself iu Prohibition, and in consequence is suffering either from a species of / in"' tffini'tt* or from the aggravated symptoms of water on the brain. Those who know the Rev. John Hosking will, we think, be inclined to agre« that it is 44 water on the brain" that affects the Prohibition divine. He a;ems to see [every thing through water, judges every thing by water, indeed it might In- said that be lives, moves, and has his being in water. His alpha and omega id water, so much so that w« fancy he would

drive to distraction the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons to discover whether or not he is a waterlily or a water-fowl. But this by the way. We admire the Rev. John Hosking, as we have already said, and we are sorry the Prohibition parson does not return the compliment. It may be that in tilting at the Press last week in that now famous phrase " The Press of this colony are the greatest liars outside of Hell," he meant us to assume a compliment, on the grounds set forth by some ancient sage that the censure of fools is praise. It requires too great a stretch of the imagination to accept this as a compliment, and we must perforce deal with the expression as conveying censure or denouncement. The Rev. John Hosking wishes the people of New Zealand to believe that the journalists of this colony are the greatest liars outside of Hell. Before the people accept this as a fact we wish to be heard in defence. First of all we question the Rev. John Hosking's status as a judge. According to scripture teaching all men are liars, and the parsons as such cannot claim exemption, for as Rudyard Kipling would say — They are neither angels nor gods, but men in a world of men.

The Rev. John Hosking is, therefore, according to the highest authority on human nature, no better than the journalist. The average parson and the average journalist probably give way to the same average number of falsehoods during the year, differing only in quality. But it may be said that the Rev. John Hosking is not an average parson, but an extraordinary one. Probably he is, indeed he must be as we shall show. He says " the Press of this colony are the greatest liars outside of hell," and to be able to make such a statement the rev. gentleman must have been " inside hell." He must have some sort of speaking acquaintance, if not an intimate knowledge of those who swelter in the

Regions of sorrow, doleful shades, where peace And rest can never dwell, hope never comes That comes to all.

A parson who, on his own showing, has moved about and studied the esoteric anthropology to be met with inside hell, and who is able to make a comparison of the art of lying as practiced inside and outside of the infernal region, must surely be an extraordinary parson. Of course the Rev. John Hosking has never been inside hell, that is patent to everyone, although the reverend sir himself may cherish some delusion in that respect; and not having been there how can he say that New Zealand journalists are the greatest liars outside hell. For all he knows to the contrary they may surpass even the dwellers within. We can, however, dismiss that phase of the subject, for the journalists of New Zealand are alleged to be the greatest liars that encumber the earth. To mouth such a sweeping condemnation the Rev. John Hosking must have an intimate knowledge of the ways and methods of the journalists of all other countries. Has he that knowledge'? We think not! Here then is a parson passing judgment on the unfortunate journalists of this colony in the most impudent manner without the slightest qualification to sit as judge.

And what is the crime that has been committed by the Press of New Zealand and which has called forth this impudent and scandalous statement'? The answer is easily given ; the newspapers of New Zealand with some few exceptions have declined to endorse the extreme measures advocated by the disciples of the water-butt. The Press has frowned at intemperate temperance as much as it has at public house intemperance, holding the view that the intemperate prohibitionist is as great a curse to the community as the liquor-sodden imbecile. The journalists have studied the interests and well-being of the people, and in doing so have crossed the path of the fad-riddled and prejudice-blended Prohibitionists. Furthermore, the John Hosking type of Prohibitionists' are suffering from the terrible ejects of a crushing defeat administered by the people aided by the Press, and in their agony they pelt mud at those who have demolished them. If the Rev. John Hosking hopes to advance the cause of Prohibition by such tactics he will discover his mistake ; indeed, such Language as be has seen tit to apply to the Press of the colony is well calculated to bring ridicule on the temperance movement. Prohibitionitts if they i-ver hope for success, must throw off the cloak of prejudice which now envelops them, mu/.zle the He v. John Hosking and other waterspout* of the same structure, and set to work leas in the belief of the potency of Acts of Parliament and more in the efficacy of example and pr ( -<vpt. Although journalists ln&y be great liars, and we acknowledge tiiffv .in- ■muiw wit nutic gentlemen m the profit>n. tin- Prohibition tist* in tlitir prt-it-nt -tau- cju -go one Ixittfr" than journalist anyday is the week.