The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, JUNE 30, 1891. TEMPERANCE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2221, 30 June 1891, Page 2

The Temuka Leader TUESDAY, JUNE 30, 1891. TEMPERANCE.

It has not surprised us to find that Mr E. T, Smith’s recent attack on the Rev. Mr Hamilton has evoked discussion. To put it mildly, Mr Smith was very indiscreet and illadvised in the action he took. The Rev. Mr Hamilton has been an indefatigable worker in the cause of temperance; no one has done more in that respect than he has during the years he has been in this district, and he ought to have great indulgences extended to him in consideration of this, if for no other reason. It was also not exactly the right thing to have attacked an absent man, bat to impute that be was influenced in his actions by mercenary considerations was unpardonable. To impute motives is always considered a breach of good taste. However, the chief point is that Mr Smith was very indiscreet in the action he took. Temperance people are not altogether so numerous that they can afford to quarrel amongst themselves. They have a terrible uphill fight before them, and to waste their strength in internecine warfare is to ensure defeat. Some of them really believe that Prohibition is as good as won. They think the next three years will settle it. When Father Matthew made five million total abstainers in five years, nearly fifty years ago, his disciples then fondly believed that a few years would settle it all, but drink is all-powerful still, and it will take a good deal of persistent effort to do away with it, even now. Let these people who are so sanguine reflect just for one moment on what they are fighting. Are they not fighting an institution which is heary with age, and which has engrafted itself on the customs of the people, besides having the wealth of the country at its back ? The trade itself is rich, but its reresources of wealth are not limited to its own treasury. The men of property believe that the general as well as local taxation is considerably lightened by the contributions ©f the liquor traffic, and it is no use to argue to the contrary with them. They see that when they pay a man a £4O cheque, and he spends it all on drink, as is often the case, £2O of that at least goes to the public revenue, and perhaps a pound or so to local rates. They see this, and no argument can make them believe that they would not have to pay it themselves if the liquor traffic were prohibited. Of course we know there are many exceptions, but as a general rule it is ( true that the- propertied classes are opposed to prohibition, chiefly through fear of having to pay more rates and taxes. Then, in addition to wealth, power, and influence, strong walls of i

prejudices, habits, and customs, have to be broken down, and these are, we believe, the greatest impediments in the way of temperance. In pointing out these obstacles we have no desire to throw cold water on temperance work in any shape or form. The men and women whe have enlisted in the crusade against strong drink are engaged in a noble work, and in the exercise of one of the highest of Christian virtues, and they deserve the respect of all well-meaning men. What wo want to point out is that stupendous obstacles bar their way, and that they want to enlist all available assistance to surmount them. There has of late risen np a disposition to despise moral suasion and condemn as renegades all who will not go the whole length of Prohibition. Very bad tactics, these. Moral suasion is the parent of Prohibition. It is the basis, the very corner-stone of the whole movement; it is the recruiting sergeant that is swelling the ranks with recruits from the enemy’s camp, and, instead of being despised as a slow-coach, it ought t#» be held in the highest respect. Prohibitionists may possibly find it difficult to understand why it is that persons who have joined the ranks of the Temperance will net go the whole length with them. They must remember that all men do not think alike, and that in a free country everyone has a right to his own opinion. They have a perfect right to try to persuade the mornlsuasionists to become prohibitionists, but they could not do anything more foolish than to attempt to coerce anyone into compliance with their wishes. To do so would turn many against them altogether, as men will not tolerate being driven. They may be led, but they will not be driven. As for the Rev. Mr Hamilton, he has said nothing except what many other temperance sympathisers have said before him. Prohibition is a very violent measure, and if carried into effect at once it would result m a reaction. Reforms of this nature must be effected gradually to be lasting in their results, and though those who wish to see the matter settled may feel impatient, it is better to wait than go to work before the proper time has arrived. The Prohibitionists have done a great deal of good ; they have called attention to the evil of intemperance in a most pointed manner ; they have stirred up the public, and made them think on the subject, and in this way they hava done good. Let them not spoil it now by overzealousness; let them let matters develope; let them take things quietly for a time—ard they will eventually succeed. But if they persist in using coercion, and in heaping abuse on those who would assist them, they will greatly retard the progress of the movement.