TEMPERANCE AND STRONG LANGUAGE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 79, 1 April 1908, Page 8

TEMPERANCE AND STRONG LANGUAGE.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Leaving Mr. Isitt to defend any language he uses, I beg space for an effort to get Mr. Oliver Mason to view the issues, License or No-License, from a different standpoint than he at present occupies. He says, "For. myself, I would do away with all liquor if it were possible, but I do not think that it is, and I am certainly not in favour j of playing into- the hands of my betters." Who are Mr. Mason's betters? The people who must have their wine, beer and whisky, no matter what it costs other people and the State? Because it is not possible to do, away with crime, would' Mr. Mason be 'in favour of licensing it? Why would Mr. Mason do away with all liquor (intoxicating, I presume) if possible? I cannot give his reasons, but I know why thousands like myself advocate "Abstinence for the individual; prohibition for the State." We can demonstrate that poisonous liquors are not necessary for life, enjoyment and prosperity. In fact, the common use of them has destroyed all these and many other blessing 3. While men, women and children are starving, Great Britain spends annually £200,000,----000 (200 million pounds) in strong drink,, and this entails further like expenditure in the vain effort to overtake the evils it produces. No intelligent person will expect to change the customs of a people with a stroke of the pen, but the open bar is such a palpable source of temptation, that we think it no longer should have State recognition. With our teetotal pledge we have turned disreputable drunkards into sober, decent citizens. The liquor traffic has turned sober citizens into drunken sots, and often undone the self-sacrificing labours of the temperance reform, and laughed at our efforts to make better men and women to maintain the efficiency of the nation. As sane individuals, we say the bar and all licensed temptations must go to the gentlemen who invented them. I wa3 going to use 1 strong language. At present there is one man in about 200 who is privileged to sell. We are after putting that man on the same footing as Mr. Mason and the other 199. That is what we call removing State sanction. We bring breweries and all sellers of intoxicating liquors under this head. We may then hope for better success with our moral suasion. For convenience of voting, we have local option. We are prepared to take national option as soon as Parliament will give it. But we use the weapons we have, and strike out the Top line, when opportunity offers, thus relieving ourselves of all responsibility. We have had to put up with the unfair handicap of 3-sths majority, but have fought on hoping justice-loving people would give us our rights, and not allow to the supporters of a 'system so prolific of evil results one and a-half votes as agajinst one vote to the individual working for the good of the Commonwealth. Under local option, it is only possible to deal with licenses in the locality. There- are plenty of other evils in the world, it is true, but that is no justification for continuing this one, -which, blocks the way of all other reforms.—l am, etc,

W. J. MAC©____o_"T. 25th March,. 1908.