PROHIBITION TACTICS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12648, 8 November 1905, Page 8

PROHIBITION TACTICS.

To the (Editor

Sir,—lt will be generally conceded that every question of social or state importance should ibe debated strictly upon its own value, and entirely apart from irrelevancies and personalities of every description. The true force and strength of argument is attained by overcoming contention with contention, and there is no surer sign of a weak cause than an advocate's excursions into the realms of personalities, and the abuse of his opponents. This during the past week has been the cotinse adopted by certain No-License advocates in this town. Having apparently exhausted their repertoire of well-known prohibition platitudes, and stock arguments, they have resorted to the most unwarrantable and untruthful abuse of the publicans and their families. These contemptible tactics, so far from creating sympathy for the cause they advocate, will, by every instinct of justice and British fair play, arouse a spirit of indigniation and censure in all who were present at the meetings. The fact of such cruel and cowardly charges having "been made is not, per se, any worse than is their utter baselessness. The publicans of Wanganui are probably as good, if not better, as a citizen class ■than those of any other town in New Zealand." They keep their.establishments clean and comfortable, close punctually at the closing hour, subscribe liberally to almost every praiseworthy object, and aro patrons and practical supporters of every sport, pastime, and movement that makes for the good of the townspeople, and the progress of the town. They are, in fact, among our most •repected and valued citizens. Turning from the reviled to their revileis, it is interesting to trace the political j careers of those public men who are the acknowledged leaders and originators of the Prohibition Party. _ Their political careers have, almost without exception, been characterised by a series of unfojnded charges, exaggerations, aspersions, useless bickerings, and baseless assertions, that have done more to lower the tone of the House than any other element during the past decade. From the time of the first prohibition coterie to the useless Left Wing, whose views, opinions, and actions, boiled down, were reducible to a political sediment of violent and unceremonious hecklings, retractions, and unqualified denunciations of anything and everything emanating from the Government, with a sou peon of Prohibition thrown in to hold it together. From this feeble faction to the notorious " New Liberals," whose advent was at once as brilliant and pungent as an explosion at a gasworks, is but a short stride. I€ may be safely said that never in the history of the New Zealand Parliament has any'political party made such a vainglorious or boastful advent, had such a brief inconsequential existence, or such an inglorious fall. If those are the men to whom our friends the prohibitionists look for leadership and guidance, and from whom they copied their policy of abuse, and vil'lification, they have had most expert ■masters. If those Churchmen who concern themselves with decrying and reviling one of the most respectable sections of the community would devote more time in seeking out the sick and needy (mentally and morally), bringing relief, consolation, and sympathy, as did the great Master they profess to follow, the small excuse there may at present be for tho prohibition movement would in a short time be nonexistent. If there is any cause for complaint at the present time the blame is not attributable to- the publican, or the system, bxrt to those Tvho, losing grip of the people through their conservativeness and naaTownes sof method, endeavour to shift the blame to the shoulders of an irresponsible and very necessary body of citizens, and make the innocent suffer for the guilty—l am, etc., JUST-ICE.

: To the Editor.' :, , '•-. Sir,—l would like; with' your permission to reply to: a„ letter ..in to-day's issue signed '-' Fair: Play." .'Tie.letter: in question is a quiet and temperate one, but " FairPJay " is a little astray* in; (his facts, and isi 'himself * guilty of what he accuses Mr Woolley I was pre-pent-at the meeting .whereat Mr Woolley classed" the liquw- sellers as being, " broadly^ ./Speaking; trained sly grog sellers.". •Now,_sir, Mr Woolley has no acquaintanoe'-with the members of the trade in this town, so cannot be accused of singling out individuals-; but: I would like to ask "Fair Play >; if that statement: (broadly speaking) is not true, how comes it that the Licensed Victuallers Association find it necessary to whip up their own members to keep the law? As at Nelson, for instance. Further, 'Mr Woolley did not say that a " publican's family was a disgrace to him," ■but he ©aid precisely what " Fair Play " himself says later on—" that the publican as a class suffers "more from disgrace through. his family, by reason of that family being more' exposed to temptation," and lie also said further that "a publican suffered just as keenly as another man over 'the' downfall of Ihis children, and ibis heart was wrung just as much as^nofher." It is foolish to think otherwise. Parental love does not depend on whether a man does, or does not > sell alcohol. .But what can be greater than the folly of a man who continues in a business which he can see is damning; his own children body and---soul,--- ancl causing himself untold anguish.—l am, etc., FAIRER PLAY-