OMNIUM GATHERUM.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2621, 15 February 1894, Page 2

OMNIUM GATHERUM.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Many of your readers of last Saturday's issue were extremely diverted by the local headed " Not True." As a piece of humour it is capital, and as a specimen of the " fine writing" which sets the teeth of a certain well-known Professor of English on edge, it is beyond question magnificent. But for humour to be thoroughly appreciated it must at least have a spice of truth in it. The Rev. L. M. Isitt was fishing down by the butts that day—not by the butts of the Temuka Rifles, but dangerously near the muzzles of those veteran sharpshooters' weapons —and he did see several evidences that the said sharpshooters were, to say the least of it, not just on the target, but anything like self-sacrificed calves with aureole enshrouded heads Honorable Richard John Seddon's even was farthest from his thoughts. He did hear next day 'rom a Temuka gentleman who had also been that day engaged in the " gentle and joyous sport" that a dead calf had been seen on the riverbed, but competent witnesses appear to differ as to whether the "! innocent cold-water- prinking " animal has lieon dead a month or six weeks. Evidently the " perfervid imagination " \s hot held in monopoly by Prohibitionist!?. Biit leaving tha alinqst famous, ruminant to.': \?ast<± ilb sweetness " on its riyor-death-bod, and tho inspired humorist to ,( blush unseen " by reason of his own veracity, 1 would turn to you,r loading article of the same date, th.e Prohibitionists «-- ro to tear up the voting papers for reducing tho number of licenses, and vote, quly iov to.tal P-rohibi-'Gertainly. Nothing can be lost by it. You, who are so earnest an advocate of temperance, ought to admire them for voting by their principles. We know yon don't think tint tho Prohibition, party will bo Y'lctoiiuivi w i tn ! > three-fifths majority, but you are at least, by your arguments on the slave (jnostion, in favor of a reduction of liconses, and, if the "total Prohibition" votes are put in with tho "decrease of lie.uses" votes; I repeat ag;iit>, nothing cm be lost by it And I firmly believe that if all temporalis people v -.in," whether for " .loonwsu " or "prohibition," that tho Prohibitionists will have their half loaf, whether they want it or not, provided always, of cjiirso, that tho Licensing Committees carry out tho wishes of tho majority, which they may or may not do, as they see fit. There appears to bo no compulsion as regards their actions in tho matter. But it is rumoured that tho Hon. Seddon's little ' Bill is at fault with regard to tho voting —how, 1 have not yet ascertained—so what will happen in the March oloctions is uncertain.

What you nay about slavery in America seems, on the face of it, very plausible ; nay, more, full of sound wisd »m. But that Lloyd. a »a.a wli?,

you must admit, had the slaves' interest ; at heart, did not uphold it, is enough for me just now. He saw the obstacles which we cannot see, or even perhaps understand, if we did see them. I may take the trouble look the question up later on. The latter part of your article is mostly nonsense. The Prohibitionists will vote, aud not throw away out of " childish petulance " what they may have, because they cannot get what they want. I have shown above that their votes will count for " reduction " anyhow. And I say you are slandering the temperance people who will not go so far as total Prohibition—yourself among the number—by imputing to them a " childish petulance " equal at least to that of the Prohibitionists. Just think of it, Mr Editor ! Imagine yourself saying, "I, the Editor of an organ devoted to the good of the masses, as against monopolists, am incensed that a body of people should go a little further than me in their devotion to the good of the masses, as against the monopolists, and will, therefore, not help in any way to rid our beautiful country from the evils fought against so persistently by the aforesaid extreme body of people." B idiculous of course! Well, Mr Editor, I didn't write this to defend our " high priest "; he can do that well enough himself I—and you—well know. I wrote it to defend our sacred cause, —whether I have succeeded in any measure I know not—and I trust that that cause will always find a staunch supporter in yourself, Mr Editor, and in yours truly, Juvenis. Temuka, Feb. 13th, 1894.

[You have indeed succeeded admirably in proving that in any discussion iu which the name of the Rev. Mr Isitt is mixed up, the temptation to exaggerate .is too great for ordinary mortals to resist. Still the main facts of tha calf paragraph appears to have been stated with wonderful accuracy. Ist, It is not disputed that there is a river; 2nd, nor that there is fish in it; 3rd, nor that the Rev. Mr Isitt was fishing. 4th, No doubt is thrown on the existence of the butts of the Temuka rifles. sth. It is admitted that the T.R.V. were practising. 6th. It is admitted that there was a dead calf in the neighbourhood. Now these six facts were the dry bones of the paragraph, and when it is remembered that the Rev. Mr Isitt was mixed up in the affair, it appears to us that tho accuracy of the calf paragraph was simply marvellous. You have also succeeded most remarkably in showing what very bad English an amateur critic of English can write. But if you ask have you done anything to advance the cause of Temperance? we answer you " Not a great deal, excepting that you show that you are ashamed of those who advised prohibitionists to tear up the voting papers for reduoiug the number of public-houses." Your contribution is valuable in ihat respect, because you have exposed the ignorauce of the leaders of the prohibitionists. They said: " Tear up the papers"; you say: "No use, they count all the same." You have also proved the villainy of the Premier iu constructing this Act, so that prohibition voting papers will count for reduction. No wonder Mr Isitt abuses the Premier who has spoiled his little game in that way. Fancy the Premier fixing up the Act so that prohibitionists must vote for reduction in spite of themselves ! No doubt he has done it at the behest of brewers aud publicans. What villains these brewers and publicans must be, to be sure, t~> conspire together in that way to shut up 25 per cent of themselves. You say our remarks on slavery in America was " full of common sense," but you would prefer to accept Lloyd Garrison's opinion. You, in fact, accept what history has proved to have been a blunder because the blunderer accepted it, in preference to what your own iutellgence tells you would have been the better course. We have felt inclined to shed a tear of grief over the grave of your intellectual independence, but realising that too much raiu has already fallen we decided on doing nothing which would tend to increase the humidity of the season. No doubt, in the same way you would prefer anything which Mr Isitt may say to what your oommon sense would suggest to you, and consequently there is no other avenue through which knowledge can be conveyed to your brain. Any one who desires to influence your mind must do so through Mr Isitt. That being so, we give you up, but don't forget to write again, and above all give it to the editor, Let him have it hot and strong, but don't try to make fun of the butts of the Temuka Rifles, beoauee really you have not much scope there. Forced wit aud humor never hit the mark; let that style alone.—Ed.]