The Catholic Church and Prohibition.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVII, Issue 43382, 13 October 1908, Page 3

The Catholic Church and Prohibition.

(Contributed) The Catholic Church exhorts its people to be. temperate, but it does not teach them to believe in prohibition. It is generally agreed that the Catholic theologians who Avith the Pope, decide upon the Church’s policy in all secular and religious matters, rank amongst the ablest and Avisest of the human race. One has only to read Instory to find out hoAv many great men tilted unsuccessfully against the Vatican. The Catholic Church today is by far the greatest Chiistian Church on earth, the head of no other Church can for a moment compare with the Pope. Napoleon said 100 years ago, “ The Pope holds in his hands the destinies of over 300 millions of the human

race. No one knows befter than the Cardinals at Rome the evils of drunkenness. The}’ are men of world-wide experience. Along with that from every part of the world reports on all vices are sent regularly to Rome. Why then does this great Church preach prohibition. Simply because fhe Hierarchy does not believe it to be possible. All the countries of South Europe are wholly Catholic. Portugal, France, Spain, Italy, Austria, South Germany, Belgium. In nearly all of these wine is the leading production and the Hierarchy knows it would be madness to try and enforce a law of the Church that would kill the leading industry in each of the great Catholic countries. Some will say that in Ireland, in Canada, in the United States, in Australia, and in New Zealand where the church is very strong, that they are not wine countries, and why does not the church insist on Prohibition there. Simply because the one law of the Church is made not for one country but for the whole world. The Catholic Church then never has favoured Prohibition, but it has and does favour temperance. In Ireland the priests and bishops and all the great Irish leaders are now engaged in a Temperance Crusade and the whole phalanx of the Irish Nationalists is supporting the present Licensing Bill. They know that the curse of. whisky had helped to make the Irish peasant so discontented and wretched just as much as the bad Government of Dublin Castle. The wretched laws of Ireland of the beginning of the 19th Century, no doubt helped to bring the Irish peasant to such hopeless slate of misery that he took to drink to drown his sorrow with the inevitable result. Father Matthew did great work to lift his countrymen out of the degradation of drink and the effects of his work extend to this day. Now through the earnest teaching of the priests and the political leaders the Irish peasant has become far more temperate than his English or Sc- <tch compeers. They have been led to see the evils of drink. The}' do not go to the hotels to drink, and all this has been done without the everlasting question we have here of No-License. The priest and the leaders of the Irish know that the first step to killing the liquor trade is to lead the people to see the evil it causes, and to become temperate, and then when that is done let them root out the whole industry if necessary, and then sober Ireland will take her true place amongst the nations of the world. 'I hen, perhaps, Erin will write the epitaph on the grave j of her brilliant patriot and martyrj | Robert Emmet. In the United States, where the Catholics are 20,000,000 and the greatest • church, there are many strong Temper- I ance Societies, which enrol the young and 1 teach it to keep away from the saloons

Now what is the Catholic Church doing for the cause of Temperance in Now Zealand. There are many temperance societies in connection with the church, but the church, as a church, does not ally itself with the No-License movement. And little wonder when it knows full well the; tactics of the so-called temperance loaders. .The Church refused to acknowledge! Father Hayes as it knew he was only the duped tool of certain parties, men to whom at other times a priest is the proverbial red rag. I think the church might do more than it does in the temperance movement. I know full well that the Hierarchy of New Zealand does not favour No-License, as it believes the scheme is doomed to failure. Well let the bishops and priests for they have power if they like to use it, p:each temperance with \igour, insist upon the young men especially not going into hotel*, follow them in and order them ou% whenever they see them going through the glided doors.—l know there are many Catholics in the trade who conduct their houses well, and who stand to loose all if the trade was taken away from them. Father Matthew ruined his uncles-distillers-but it did not cause him to stop on his mission. I would like to see the whole trade done away with throughout New Zealand were it possible, but it never „ will be done voting No-License, as there is ample 'evidence that under No-License there is as much drink consumed as under license When such is the case, the drink must be consumed in the homes, and that to my mind, is far worse than consuming it in the hote ls I cannot vote for No License 1 1 the coming poll for the following reasons. 1. No-lieense fails to stop drinking, see returns of alcohol sold in the NoLicense districts.

2. Because of the cant and hypocrisy of most of the men who arc lecturing on the subject. 3. Because there are no temperance principles in No-license, the great majority of those who vote for it do not want to do away with alcohol, but want to get at the brewers, want to take the. trade from them so that it may become a government monopoly. 4. Because I think that a publican should receive some compensation when No-license is carried in a district—not momentary, but given so many years’ warning, say three years after the carrying of No License, his hotel to be closed.—(The English Licensing bill contains a proviso something like above, but a larger term of years'. 5. And because No-license does not mean No Liquor. That it does not mean it, is the fault of the No-licence leaders of New Zealand, and one can form no other conclusion from their opposition to the famous clause 9 which provided No-license to mean No Liquor, that they do not want to stop the drinking, but simply to close the bars.

It is a matter for the individual man or woman, whether he or she, shall, or shall not vote No-license, but I for one fail to see any benefit in No-license when it does not mean No Liquor—did it mean that I would vote for it without any hesitation. As it is I cannot support a crusade which in many cases battens men who are decidedly unfit to lead other men into the right paths. P.S. —In case readers of your paper have not seen tho daily papers to read an account of liquor sold in No-license districts, I submit a synopsis of the certified statement from the’ Department of Justice, Wellington. Betum of liquor, (alcoholic) sent in the districts of

Invercargill, Oamaru, and Ashburton since No-license came into force, laid before Parliament August 1008. Invercargill.—l23,9s2s gallons, principally beer and whisky, 0amaru.—29,196 gallons, 37,766 bottles, of Avhich 14,349 Avere Avhisky, 8 barrels, 612 cases, 1 keg, 1 jar, 18 hogsheads, 167 flasks. Ashburton.— lo2,9B2A gallons, 3330 bottles, 8,788 cases, of Avhich 8253 were Avhisky and at a dozen bottles to the case runs into 99,036 bottles of whisky. Hoav anyone can ttate No-License is a success after reading the above statement beats me. There Avere no hotels for this, no open bars, so Avhat must the diinking in the homes be, the Avorst of all forms of drinking.—l am, etc., Yisitoh to Te Aroha.