SMOKING AND STRONG LANGUAGE.

Otaki Mail, Volume 26, 5 September 1919, Page 4

SMOKING AND STRONG LANGUAGE.

_ * ARE THEY GAINING ON US? Professor Gilbert Murray, an arresting lay preacher, chose an interesting theme for a recent address to the Civic and Moral Education . League. "Can we," he asked, "make any moral estimate of our own time; It seems that not only are wc unable to judge whether we are as a community moving towards health or away from it; we cannot even say what health is. We were gaining on alcohol, but tobacco and bad language seemed lo be gaining on us.

"Tobacco," said the professor, "is a slight narcotic poison; the use of bad language I take to be due to a slight nervous convulsion momentarily do-' stroying selkcontrol and releasing certain sub-conscious interests, such as extreme rage and love of filth, which are normally suppressed. I do not venture to pronounce whether the use of this slight narcotic and the management of this slight nervous convulsion are beneficial or otherwise, or whether as some suggest they .should be confined to women and people of sedentary habits; but I would call attention to what I think is the fact, that never in the history of the world has there been a society in which both men and women were so habitually under the influence of these two sedatives-as-at present."

I "A hopeful critic might suggest that, as we stagger back into equilibrium, hygiene will correct the one and soeml decency the other—-although no one would imagine that English behaviour is ever likely to go back to the conventions of the Victoria parlour," says the "Daily News." "Apart, howlever, from the examples touched upon by Professor Murray it is not true that as regards certain matters of great moment the available evidence would impel us to anything but an optimistic conclusion —for instance, sexual ethics and regard for truth.' The changes in the sex relation may well prove to be the gravest of the enduring results of the war on Western society. As for the habit of lying, we may call a Cambridge authority to witness. A few days ago Sir Charles Walston, hitherto more concerned with the line arts than with morals, ■ sent out a little volume on Truth, which he might more appropriately have labelled 'The Lie in Modern Life.' since it is an almost un-relieved-indictment of the unveracity j—social and political, commercial and ' "*ofosiipnal in which the modern "■■ .. :-*=» i* stifled. If Professor social organism . " _„ fIM .^ Murray had applied his own _

cial method to an analysis of Sir Chas. Walston's thesis, he would, we doubt not, have found in English politics, commerce, and journalism much more encouragement than is discernible to the censor of the sister university. But assuredly he would have had to agree that in this essential matter of keeping faith in our dealings we are not noticeably better than our grandparents."