TEMPERANCE AND PROHIBITION.

Press, Volume L, Issue 8535, 15 July 1893, Page 5

TEMPERANCE AND PROHIBITION.

At the Tuam street Hall, last night, Mr M. Davie delivered an address on " Temperance, from the moderate drinkers' and thinkers' points of view."- There-was a fairly large attendance. Mr Davie read a letter of apology for absence from his Worship the Mayor, who was to have presided, and proceeded with his address without a Chairman.

Mr Davie, in his introductory remarks, said that he was present at the request of many friends to deliver an address on Temperance. He stood there by the right hitherto accorded to every free man in this free country to express his sentiments or opinions upon a public question, and he claimed also the right of criticising the public remarks of previous speakers. But above all he stood before them as one small particle of that moderate mass of mankind, which, perhaps fortunately for itself and others was not fond of rushing to extremes —a mass which had always been, however, a zealous guardian both of its own liberties and those of others. (Applauss.) Having said bo much by way of introduction he would bring under their notice the wide Bubject of temperance. Perhaps moderation was the nearest word in the English language equivalent in meaning to temperance. Both words indicated a certain idea of restraint or governing power. The moderate or temperate party applied the word ti individual restraint of self. The prohibitionist or fanatic party seemed rather to consider the word as inviting them collectively to restrain others. In the Engli—t language there existed no word of more beautiiul meaning than temperance. That it was which framed our laws, regulated our social relations, made life happy and pleasant, guided us from the cradle to the grave, and even after death the kindly voice of temperance while keeping our good qualities in remembrance had yet a word of pity for our many failings. (Applause.) Much more might be said of temperance, but the qualities just attributed to it were enough to give a keen sense of its opposites. Like many English words, it was often made to denote some meaning altogether foreign to its nature; and here let him express his joy that the prohibitionists had at last discarded a title to which they could never honestly lay claim, and had adopted one which fitted them like a glove. The opposites of temperance were nasty subjects. In some cases they became our masters, and were then more dangerous as social pests to their owners than the possession of the largest sheep run in New Zealand could ever be. (Laughter and applause.) For centuries che master minds of kings, emperors, statesmen and philosophers throughout the world had failed to devise any plan whereby these evils might be abated. Some Cbibitionist gentlemen in Christchurch raver, seemed to have settled the question in a few months. The chief object of attack with them was the demon oi intemperate drink. He was also called by other names, such as the " Liquor Traffic," Ac. lake most of his fellow opposites, he was a good servant but a bad master. He was bad enough in all conscience, but not so black as some of the others. He (Mr Davie) would mention a few of them, as he would have more to say about drink later on. Intemperate speech did more harm to the, world than all the wines and spirits ever manufactured by man. (Applause and a voice— "No.") A pound of salt or a gallon of water swallowed quickly might kill one man; an intemperate word might ruin a nation. (Applause.) He would here advise prohibitionists - to train themselves to the use of temperate language before they ventured to instruct others. By the use of temperate language no trade would suffer, no families would be rendered homeless, and social life altogether

would be made more pleasant. By its use not only the mtemperate see_ou of the prohibitionista, but every reader of a newspaper would be a great gainer. LutemSrate deeds were more often than not the rect outcome of intemperate speech. They varied from the conaparauvely harmless to the blackest bad. The worst kind affected the persons, the next worst the liberties of others. The writers of the Bible and the experience of centuries coacarred in placing intemperance in food almost at the head of tbe black list. It included food and drink of every description. The death of one of our English Kings by &n over-feed of lampreys, and the recent death of the intemperate water drinkers iv Paris were well known instances which at least "pointed a moral." (Laughter and applause. ) A special note of warning was also intended to be sounded to those who might fill themselves to repletion, even with such apparently harmless articles as ginger beer or buns. (Renewed laughter.) Intemperance in truth was very deadly. It struck at the base of our national, political and social iabricsj and was/ strong eaough to shatter all or any of them. It destroyed the natural grace of childhood. It blasted youth. It crowned the white hairs of the old with lasting, dishonour. He thought he had mentioned enough opposites for his purpose. Though oae he had forgotten, and it was intemperance in religion. King Solomon warned us against being too reli-, gious. (Laughter.) By this time they would probably guess what he was about to say, and that was- that temperance or moderation was our only safe guide. Intemperance was not only faulty as regarded vice, but even virtue over-cultivated in one i direction had much the same final effect as vice. Those who had studied lunacy would tell you that.religious mania was as hopeless as madness caused; by any other excess. (Applause.) Bright truth herself might be carried to such a pitch that she became an offence. Courage, another God-given attribute, might by excessive -ultivation merge into brutality; and a "man might so overdo charity that while helping others his own children suffered. Intemperance in overdoing one reform had much the same effect. Ralph Waldo Emerson said on this subject. "Many a reformer perishes i in his removal of rubbish, and that makes ' the offensiveness of the class. They are. partial; they are not equal to the work j they pretend. They lose their way in the \ assault on the kingdom of darkness. They | expend ail their energy on some accidental i evil, and lose their sanity aud power of benefit. It is of little, moment that one or two, or twenty errors of bur social system be corrected, but of much that the man be in his senses. The criticism and attack on institutions which we have witnessed has made one thing plain, that -society gains nothing, whilst a man, not himself renovated, attempts to renovate things around him. He has become -tediously good in some one particular, but negligent or narrow I in the rest, and hypocrisy and vanity are often the disgusting result. It is handsomer to remain in the . establishment, better than the establishment, and conduct that in the best possible manner, than to make a sally against evil by some single improvement without supporting it by a total i regeneration. Do not be so vain of your one objection. Do you think there is only one? Alas, my good friend, there is no part of society or of life better than any other part. All our things are right and wrong together. The wave of evil washes all our institutions alike. When we see an eager assailant of one of these wrongs, a special reformer, we feel like asking him—What right have you, sir, to your one virtue ? Is virtue piecemeal ? This ia a jewel amidst the rags of a beggar." This writer was a healthy I study for the prohibitionist disease. (Laughter.) He would give a short early history taken from an authority which Mr Isitt, as a minister of, the gospel, would no doubt acknowledge/though in common with other prohibitionists.tie would probably disclaim its' teachings wherever it ventured to cross the sacred line of prohibition. Scrip- j ture throughout affirmed the desirability of j drink, though it warned us against excess in drink as well as in food. He might say that the Rev. A. Chodowski had, in the j public press effectually disposed of the prohibition theory that the wines of Scripture were non-intoxicating. (Cries of "No.") ] We were told that Noah was the first who planted a vineyard win©; Prohi- | bitionists doubtless rebelled in the fact that ! Noah got druftki ancient writers of opinion that. Noah's intemperance was caused by his previous total abstinence. \. (Renewed laughter). We. j had no reason to believe that after his first j experience he became either a drunkard or a prohibitionist. The history of moderation with occasional excesses, flowed smoothly along till we came to the time of Sampson, who was a Nazarite.'vThis sect neither cut their hair lior drank-•-wine. Aman joined the sect by his voluntary vow, which lasted in some few instances for life; in the greater number for short-periods. When the time originally fixed by the , vow had expired the .Nasuarite'. again-.'liyed like other men. The world rolled;oD its years with varying periods of sobriety aud . druukenness, of moderation and excess. During all this time a Jewish sect called Rechabites conscientiously avoided liquor, and they had several Christian imitators. Some fifty, or sixty years ago" 'a crusade set in against j the use of drink. The teetotalleis, ! so called from one of their leaders ,who stammered . when pronouncing the i word "t-t-t-total abstinence" were among the assailants of drink. After a while these while distinguished by. many different names seemed to adopt by mutual consent the name of " temperance," a name wholly at variance with their practice. j These men did, much practical good iv their time, they made 'the Bible their standard, reclaimed the drunkard, helped the fallen, and generally set. an example well worth imitation. But this was too good to last, and he would now speak locally. Since the teetotallers became/ prohibitionists they seemed to have dropped their old practical work. The Salvation Array and the Magdalen Asylum had taken over the work of reformation.' (Applause.) The prohibitionist's one idea seemed to be " Do away with drink, ' get "into- Parliament, and govern the country." (Laughter, and a Voice — "A little mote light,") The Prohibitionists had given their opinion of the drunkard ; they had treated every moderate*'drinker as a potential drunkard, a view from which he strongly dissented. (Applause). : - He would present the prohibitionist with an estimate of his position from? the moderate point of/view. He would divide our population into three classes. The prohibitionists occupied one extreme, the drunkards the other; but the vast mass of' temperate or moderate men filled in the-space between. (Hear, heat). The great temperate party, bound together only ay the rules of common-sense and the force .of education, practically, though quietly, governed- the world. Its views represented our religions, laws, trades, and customs; its energy kept . our industries going, its moderation prevented (or ought to prevent), our being hampered with too many laws. This party the prohibitionist, with his usual assurance, put quietly on one side. He (the speaker) could take off his hat to the man who, from choice or conviction, touched no intoxicating liqnor, who mingled freely with his fellow-men, and, 'whose actions in other respects were marked by temperance. He could admire the moderate drinker, whose deeds, words and. actions were in all respects temperate. He could feel sorrow and pity for the drunkard, who might, however, have fallen into more debasing'sins than that of drink. He had very little respect for one who; had.fallen so low inihis own estimation that he was compelled to join a society to keep himself sober—■■ (applause)—or who entertained a low opinion of his fellow-men that he imagined they could not keep sober without his help. (Laughter.) He placed such a man above; the drunkard, but infinitely below him who could trust himself. . Such .was the prohibitionist of to-day.. Elevated on the platform of his own 'self-sufiiciency, he presumed to • instruct temperate: people. In some kinds of intemperance, he was more intemperate than tbe average drunkard, as could be seen. What right had the prohibitionist to his one virtue, if it be a virtue, cultivated so carefully to the exclusion of others? .Whoasked him' to govern' us, and from whence was the authority with which he spoke derived * Rudyard Kipling, in one of his prefaces, said—"The.drawback of collecting dirt -in one corner ?s that it gives a false notionof the filth of the room. Folk who understand and have knowledge of thenown will be able to strike fair averages." He (the speaker) accused the prohibitionists of their collection of moral

and physical filth. He accused them further of grossly exaggerating its amount as subsequent) details would prove. Confining what he might say of their disadvantages to their own published utterances, he would first take their chief apostle, the Rev. L. M. Isitt. (Applause.) There was much to admire in this gentleman's public character. He had the courage of his opinions, which unfortunately were at times somewhat narrow. The young men of Sydenham were much indebted to the rev. gentleman for their gymnasium, and it was said that he taught them proficiency in the noble art of self-defence. (Laughter.) And tbey would give him credit for this and other good works. But set Mr Isitt on his favourite hobby oi prohibition, and they lose the man but find the fanatic (Laughter.) Governments, Judges, Bishops were invited to cower beneath the lash of his sarcasm. Even the memory of the dead was not spared. (Hear, hear and hisses.) His statement that more drink was sold in the Christchurch hotels on Sunday than ou a week-day was at least an intemperate statement. His sweeping denunciations of the drunkenness of England, Germany and France were general. How such ordinary mortals as Bismarck must wince when they saw of what fearful material that great, victorious German Army of 1870-71 was composed. -He (Mr Davie) could pick out plenty of other instances, but had, he thought, shown that Mr Isitt was at least intemperate in speech, if not in fact. (Cries of "No.") The Rev. J. Hosking usually posed in the role of a Christian minister. (Laughter.) Several articles of his in the correspondence columns. of the Press vouched alike for his scholarly training, broad view? and intimate knowledge of the Hebrew language. (More laughter.) Certain detective instincts had induced him to pass the usual bounds of temperance in his attacks upon Mr A. B. Worthington. (Hear, hear.) Possibly he regarded that gentleman as the incarnation of his Satanic Majesty. He (the speaker) owed Mr Hosking a personal apology. He once answered one of Mr Hosking's letters in the Press. Never having seen that gentleman until Mr Collins' meeting, he was for the first time enable-.! to form his own opinion of his intellectual capacity as evidenced by the questions he asked. Permit him now formally to apologise for ever having taken the trouble to answer an effusion emanating from that gentleman. (Loud laughter.) Mr G. J. Smith appeared as a candidate for Parliament upon his Own recommendation and that of his friend and co-prohibitionist Mr T. E. Taylor. It was the speaker's misfortune never to have met or heard Mr Smith. Mr Taylor, however, publicly refers to him as a square-headed man. Knowing little about this subject he (Mr Davie) went down to the Museum and inspected the skulls. (Laughter.) One previously belonging to a Flat-head Indian came nearest Mr Taylor's description, and the caretaker kindly explained that the skull did not denote a high order of intelligence. (Loud laughter.) The owner of that skull probably passed his life in the pursuit of game; MrSmith apparently spent a large portion of his in the chase after drink. He could say nothing of Mr Smith's intemperance, except that he publicly appeared in the company of the gentlemen he had mentioned. Mr T. E. Taylor hid had prohibition badly—(laughter)—type somewhat violent. (Renewed laughter.) He was a practiced orator, and his choice of words was said to be remarkably good. From bis published speeches, he (Mr Davie) would insult Mr Taylor if he did not credit him with his full share of intemperance. The prohibitionists as a body were always placing themselves in positions retreat from which was impossible save by deuial of their own words or equivocation. At the Sydenham licensing election only a few months' ago they were for absolute forced prohibition. Now they were only anxious to direct'the matter, aud to give the people an opportunity of saying what was to do done. (Hear, hear.) Mr Isitt had denied published statements of his speeches,-Mr Taylor had also denied them on behalf of Mr Isitt. If they really wished to gain public sympathy they should deal fairly and squarely with those, around them—(hear, hear)—-infuse a little more true liberalism into their views, and treat those who differed from them more charitably. (Applause.) They had restored, though somewhat soiled by their handling, the spotless name of Temperance. , Let them beware how .they borrowed the sacred mantle of &s§!•*! = <Heat, hear.) Mr T. E. Taylor'has quotedTroaT the London Weekly Times- concerning - the drink question, and he would quote extracts from the leadiug article of that paper of May 19th,., 1893, .which might be taken-as being fairly up to date. "If the printing of .Bills, could solve the f Drink Question,' we ought to be the soberest people on earth by the end of the present session. Numerous remedies for excessive drinking have been laid before Parliament, aud three of them have been introduced on high authority, aud subjected to a certain degree of discussion. The Government have undertaken to deal with tbe matter in the drastic and oppressive fashion which commends it3elf to the more advanced apostles of freedom when they propose to operate at the coat of other people. That project, however, has been so completely riddled both inside and outside the House, that very little more is likely to be heard about it from anybody, except the Opposition, who may be relied upon no doubt to keep its memory green in the minds of the masses whoso comfort and convenience it so seriously menaced. The real evils of all plans of this kind were indicated in the short but sensible speech .with which Lord Salisbury brought the debate to a close—' Everybody in these days is opposed to excessive drinking, and if any measure could be devised which held out a reasonable probability of exterminating or even of greatly diminishing this terrible plague, without inflicting -injuries woise even than * those caused by drink itself, such a measure would be eagerly welcomed by all classes, and carried out at all costs. But no such measure has. been devised, or seems indeed to be possible. Schemes like those proposed by the Governmeut, are at once unjust- and futile.' They are based oa principles which, r if logically pursued, would lead- as i they have led before to what Lord Salisbury called 'ethical persecution,' and all attempts to cram them down the throatß of, the people will surely lead to a reaction, dangerous to the cause.of.true temperance. That cause, as Lord Salisbury pointed out, has made very marked progress among the upper and middle classes of this country within the last hundred years. In the reign of George IV., and even later, hard drinking waa no uncommon thing in good society. The barbaric vice? has almost died out among the classes, with progress of education and refinement. Refinement and education are spreading year after year among the masses in an ever-progressive ratio. * Is it quite unreasonable to hope that, long before any amongst the various schools of temperance advocates have hit upon an acceptable and practicable plan;; for reforming the ;drink traffic, the people will have reformed it i altogether themselves." That was from a leading article in a leading paper in the leading city in Mr Isitt's "Drunken England." (Applause.) Now for _' few temperance figures with regard to New Zealand. The London Times, dated 26th May last, said, "Since 1878 the consumption of alcoholic spirits in New Zealand has decreased to the extent of 48 per cent., the consumption of imported ale has fallen off 60" per cent., and that of the local beer-22 per cent. In 1882 the population of New Zealand was 517,707, in 1892 it was 650,000, showing a gam of 132,726, Which may be roughly stated as an increase of about 25 percent. Amount of duties paid on liquors in 1882 amounted to £549,447, in 1832 this amount only preached £464,209, showing a decrease of £85,238." These figures went far to prove that New Zealand waseven more temperate in the use of liquor than England. Lord Salisbury ascribed the improvement in England, to education and refinement. Mr Collins ascribed the improvement in New Zealand to education and comfort. The "Prohibition Party" would doubtless with its usual, modesty ascribe the improvement, to its own efforts. (Laughter and applause;) In considering the duration of lite of total abstainers and moderate drinkers the following extract from the Wellington Evening Press would be of ioterest:—"The British Medical Journal of the 23rd June contains the report of the Collective Investigation Committee appointed for this purpose, and it will, we are sure, be a surr rise to the general public, and a shock to extreme Temperance advocates, to learn that the report is by no means favourable to the theory that total abstainers live longer than other people. The

inquiry was conducted in this manner. No fewer than 187 members of the British Medical Association obtained particulars regarding the habits of 4234 persons, aged twenty-five years and upwards, recently deceased. These were divided into five classes, namely, total abstainers, habitually temperate, careless drinkers, tree drinkers, and decidedly intemperate. The age of death of those in each class was registered together with the cause of death, and the average age at death for each class was found to be as follows:—Total abstainers, 51.22 years; habitually temperate, 62.13 years; careless drinkers, 59.67 years; free drinkers, 57.59 years; decidedly intemperate, 52.03 years. According to this the total abstainers died at an earlier age than any other class, not excepting habitual drunkards. It was quickly seen, however, that this was an error arising from the fact that total abstainers are on an average much younger than persons who use stimulants; which means in other words that few people carry tbe habit of total abstinence through life, by far the greater number of persons above the middle age coming under class B, namely, habitually temperate. In order to correct this error therefore the Committee set to work to prepare a second table, consisting of two columns, from one of which all persons who died under thirty were omitted, and from the other all who died under forty. This gave the following results:—Total abstainers under 30 57.31, under 40 62.74; habitually temperate under 30 64.48, under 40 67.71; careless drinkers under 30 6L52, under 40 64.65; free drinkers under 30 58.87, under 40 61.98; decidedly intemperate under 30 53.42, under 40 57.47. The effect of this is to show that as the younger live 3 are eliminated, the difference between the abstainers and, the moderate drinkers becomes less marked, but that throughout the moderate drinkers have the advantage. It will be seen from the third column that, even when all lives under forty are eliminated—that is to say, shutting out of the calculation the great number of young people who died oefore the age when on an average the habit of using alcohol is contracted—the moderate drinkers were still found to live five years longer than the total abstainers, and the careless drinkers two years longer. The British Medical Association seems to have adopted these figures as conclusive, and the Post Magazine and Insurance Monitor, the recognised insurance organ, in an able article on the subject, endorses that view." The figures | quoted afforded one more instance, if that ! were needed, in favour of moderation. It | would hardly be fair on his part to dwell in ■ detail on the difference in the physique of i the average moderate drinker, when com- [ pared with that of the average prohibitionist iv this city — (hear, hear) —but without | offence he would mention the fact that as i yet no total abstinence cricket or football team had here proved its superiority ito those composed of moderate drinkers; no four-oared crews, no rifle shooting team, no other branch of athletics had here marked the total abstainer of Christchurch as possessing qualities of endurance or application superior to those of ordinary mortals. (Applause.) No building worthy of note marked the interest of the prohibition party in this city in which they live; no charitable institution wholly theirs distributed its benefits to those around them. Yet they could raise large sums of money to con tea c the law of the country. Could they say the same of she great temperance party, the real workers of the world, whose very existence they so contemptuously ignored. If prohibitionists had their way we could not but think they would be quite as intolerant as were the Protestants under Elizabeth, or the Catholics under Mary, both of which parties impartially burned their religious opponents at the stake. (Applause.) Looking at these events in the calm light of history, had we not good reason to make a stand against intolerance of any kind ? Was it not an acknowledged fact that, even at the present day, tens of thousands of hypocrites used religion to cloak their swindles? Would any moderate ohinker condemn religion as a whole, and endeavour to wipe it-out altogether because a few thousand scoundrels had prostituted that which was in itself good? Why then compel every man to be an abstainer because the few drink to excess? The Rev.;Mr leitt had said that it. was impossible to regulate the drink,traffic. (A Voice—" So it .is."), It, had.-just occurred Ito him thafcthe same.drink /traffic"had' been" "regulated in one ih'atafice at least since the; time of Moses. (Laughter aud cheers.) Take the Jewish people. Such a thing as a Jewish tetotaller was almost unknown ; such a thing as 'a Jewish drunkard was almost equally, unknown. (Applause.) What was the reason why we could not be as good as they were? His opinion was that the laws of Moses were and are the best sanitary and physical code that the world had ever possessed. With all our boasted civilisation we declined to . take advantage of laws that were printed for our use many thousands of years ago. (Applause.) It was. only fair to conclude that being particular in their choice of-meat, the Jews were equally particular in their choice of drink. He really thought that if ministers, who endeavoured to teach us the ways we should go, would look into these laws of Moses aud put them before the people, the whole drink question and temperance would be settled in three months' time. (Hear, hear). With a certain degree of duplicity, the prohibitionists had two distinct ways of taking in the public on the direct veto questiou. One way seemed to be their way of thinking, the other was apparently adopted to catch support from outside. If the great temperate body which, as he pointedoutbefore,containedneitherdrunkard nor prohibitionist desired the direct veto it will become law. (Hear, hear.) He took it, however, that the prohibitionist party by their intemperate actions, intemperate speeches, and total disregard of the wishes of others have done more than perhaps they thought in killing their own pet measure. (Applause,'"" No, no," and interruption.) The statistics of the decrease of drink in New Zealand, previously quoted from official sources, were more reliable evidence as to the amount consumed than the verbal statements of men whose [ public utterances had been remark- ' able neither for accuracy nor straightforwardness. -He took it also, that t even had this not been the case the bulk [of-our "great temperate body" would be disinclined to trust all or any of its liberties to tbe tender mercies of prohibition. The remarks made by Lord Salisbury on the ' subject represented as nearly as possible the average temperate view, for if his remarks were correct with regard to England, they were trebly true in regard to New Zealand, which statistics proved was a far more sober country. He took it that the Great Temperance Body would not move in the Direct Veto matter (except for the sake of stopping it) till better reasons than had yetbeen.set forth were adduced in its support. Concerning the social evil, he said the question afforded a worse illustration of badly attempted reform than the matter of drink, and more terrible evils lay in the wake of the hideous policy of repression than all the accumulated evils of all the drunkenness which had yet been under the sun. (Applause.) If he had shown that intolerance, intemperance, untruth, and extreme views were things to be avoided; if he had demonstrated that a general good average was a higher and better possession for any man than one virtue cultivated at the expense of others; if they harboured one more kindly thought, or did one more kindly action to tbe downtrodden ; if any remark of his had led them more to appreciate the state of freedom in which we lived, and for which our forefathers bled; if, in short, temperance in its widest sense seemed fairer in their eyes than mere abstention from drink, that evening had not been spent in vain. (Loud applause. He concluded by reading an extract from Spinoza's works,; Ethic IV-, proposition 45, and said he wa_ prepared to answer reasonable questions. (Appiausu.)_

In answer to questions, he said the betting was about.level on drnnkarda coming from moderate drinkers and total abatainers. The same exercise of moderation wmcn would cure intemperate speech and inculcate* charity would not only cure drunkenness, but would prevent any man from getting drunk. (Load applause.) He then returned his thanks to those who ™ re f <£ listening to him, and especially did he thank those members of the prohibitionist party for the way they had treated him, for he expected they would have made it warm for him. (Applause, and a voice—" They'll deal tenderly with you"; laughter.) He imagined they did because he had let tbern down so lightly. (Renewed laughter.) i The proceedings then closed.