PROHIBITION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2191, 21 April 1891, Page 3

PROHIBITION.

ro THE EDITOR,

Sie, —It was amusing to listen to the speakers called to build up the ueople on the prohibition of the liquor traffic. We bad two who were total abstainers, and, as such, determined to do all in their power to assist in putting down tbe evil. Another said he was a total abstainer, but would be in favor of granting compensation to publicans if they were going to close their bouses for the sale of liquor, but I think he forgot that the hotels could still be used as accommodation houses without tbe license to dispose of stuff that destroys both body and soul. The fourth was in favor of closing all places for the sale of liquor, but would like to see it brought into tbe home, where the beads of that home were alone responsible for the manner in which it was conducted. The fifth could not see any harm in s public-house as at present constituted, nor coqld he see any harm in a glass of liquor. Now, Mr Editor, with myself you will see that we had a body of men running in [different groove, but not all fit to be on the platform that evening. X would

not have troubled you at thittime, only such views as those put forth by the fifth speaker are to my mind unbearable, as I reckon that there is no one that is a greater curse to a people than a moderate drinker. He said if a man gets drunk he is a lunatic, and should be shut up and treated as such, but perhaps the lunatic has not swallowed as much drink in his lifetime as the moderate drinker. Now this is where I the evil of that gentleman’s creed rests. A young man hears of, or sees, that So-and-so can take a glass and let it alone without making a beast of himself; I see no harm in me trying to do the same, But his constitution is different, hence he cannot let it alone when he would like to, as the gnawing worm in him is never quenched until it drags him to a drunkard’s grave, and I am sure no one ever met a drunkard who intended to be such when he took his first glass. Again, this gentleman preaches week after week urging on all men to give up sin and live a pure and holy life. Now does not drink lead to sin and impure habits, and if a man asks people to give up sin, while saying at the same time that strong drink will do them no harm, how can he expect people to be pure and hely ? Our body is the temple of the living God, and if we pollute our body by drink and sin, how can we expect God’s Spirit to dwell in that temple ? Therefore, sir, I would be in favor of going down deeper than the public-house by starting at the pulpit, and the Church should allow no man to preach the dodfcrine of purity and holiness unless he gave up what makes men unholy and impure. Allow no man to be an elder or leader of a Church who did not walk and live as such a one should do. Allow no man or woman to be a member of such » body unless they have given up their lives into the hands of the living God to guide and direct. And, further, allow no man or woman to be a member of the Good Templar order who has rested interests in a public-house, as they cannot walk up to their obligations if they have such interests. And if the rising generation saw men and women acting and living up to to their profession in religion and temperance, they too would see that it was a life worth living and follow in our footsteps. And if all were educated and brought up in that light, the brewer and the publican would of their own free will seek a better emplopment to earn a living ; and further, if such was the position of New Zealand society the air would be purer, by not being polluted with the odour of alcohol. Not only that, but all class hatred and bitter sectarian could not coexist with a living faith in Jesus Christ. Trusting you will give this space in your paper, I am, etc.. Total A sstainse. Geraldine, 14th April, 1891.