LIQUOR QUESTION

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 145, 22 June 1922, Page 8

LIQUOR QUESTION

INSTRUCTION TO CHILDREN

ON VIRTUE OF TEMPERANCE

PRESENT METHODS DISCUSSED,

Temperance instruction in schools, with particular reference to Pamphlet 13, was discussed by the Council of Education to-day. The matter was introduced by Mr, It, M-Callum, M.P., who moved : —"That this council considers the temperanco teaching should be so revised ac to avoid creating a conflict of ideas in the child-mind in regard to normal family life, and should be so framed as to secure the sympathetic support of all parents, and so that all teachers may ■conscientiously instruct the- children without suck instruction conflicting with their own personal habits of life.". Mr. M'Calhim. said he wished to bo fair in his remarks on a subject which was tearing this happy country in twain. This was a. free country, and great latitude should be allowed to a man if lie wanted to take a glass of wine. He denied the doctrine that anyone should dictate to him what he might drink. Itwas a pity the matter had cropped up—■ (Hear, hear) —and that the Department had not been more subtle in dealing with tlie question in the first place. He hoped that the country was approaching the Jast occasion on which, it would have to vote on the liquor issue. Many people voted Prohibition because Ihoy opposed the present system of licensing, not because they wore Prohibitionists. So far as Prohibition' in America was concerned '■'■ Tho Director': "Excuse me, Mr. M'Callu-m, but you must keep to the motion in its relation to temperance teaching." PAMPHLET 13. Mr. M'Calhim said that Pamphlet_l3 was not a. fair exposition of teaching that this country should countenance. At this stage the discussion was adjourned until copies of the pamphlet were obtained for circulation among members of the council. . • ' When the pamphlets were secured, Mr. M'G'allum asked if there were any copies of the Moderate League's pamphlet at hand. "No," replied the chairman, Mr. J. CaugMey, Director of Education; "wo dent circulate that." (Laughter.) Continuing, Mr. M'Callum said that Pamphlet 13 was not wisely framed. Many people in high positions agreed with him that the Department had no right to pat its imprimateur on such a document. At any rate, the Christchurch Press had said that a portion of the pamphlet was to be withdrawn. Mr. M'Callum denied the statement in the pamphlet that alcohol was a poison. Such a statement showed how biased the author of the pamphlet was. Then the economic problem and the drink question were touched upon in the pamphlet. What had boys and giris'to do with the economic problem? If the liquor trade went out of existence it would be necessary to put. a tax on tea in. order to get revenue to carry on education. The main objection to tho wholo pamphlet was the confusion between the use and abuse of liquor. An attempt had been made to raise a. bogey, for the pamphlet was not true in detail. Mr. M'Callum drew attention to what he termed "distortions" and "twistings" in the document in regard to the effects of alcohol on the human body. Tho author of the. pamphlet had twisted the British Scientific Committee's report to suit him-' self. Truth must be taught to the chil-. dren at all costs. It was deplorable that they could not have some middle course in dealing with the liquor question. If they could urge that hotels should sell 'only light wines and light ales, and that the sale of spirits should be suppressed, then they would be teaching the children on right lines. The Hon. D. T. Fleming, M.L.C., seconded the motion pro forma. DEPARTMENT SUPPORTED. " I think it is a pity this question was brought up here," said Miss E. A. Chaplin, B.A. (Christchnrch). If the.j resolution were to be carried out, teachers would not be free to teach children anything about things on which their parents were at fault. Quite apart from the political aspect, the Department was doing .the right .thing in teaching the children about the evils o£ indulgence in liquor. , Where were they going to draw the line in regard to moderation? It seemed to her that it was nothing but politics to bring the Moderate League's pamphlet before the council. The pamphlet appeared to have been drawn up by opponents of temperance reform. To give such weight to the Moderate League's pamphlet as had been done was absurd. . As an amendment, Mr. W. A. Banks (Rangiora) moved : "That this council congratulates the Department on the issue of Pamphlet 13." The Department had done something which would certainly improve the generation that was coming on. Mr. E. C. Banks (Auckland) seconded the amendment, and said that political interference with the Department should be avoided. They wanted their young people to grow up respectable. The teachers instilled ideas; of temperance into the children, but it was a disgraceful state of affairs to see young men of 21 and 22 getting drunk. .As a whole, the teachers were a moderate set of people, although they were not all Prohibitionists; Mr. F. H. Campbell, M.A. (OUgo), regretted that the Minister was not present to hear the discussion. The Department was wrong in putting out the pamphlet in its present form. There was nothing in the pamphlet that did not teach Prohibition. The Department was wrong in taking sides and making a political issue of the question. . " NOT STRICTLY TRUE." Dr. E. Bryson (Levin) said she could not honestly believe that some of the things in the pamphlet were strictly true, and that was why she could riot support the amendment. Slip believed in teaching total abstinence, but the pamphlet should be modified so as to make its statements perfectly trne. The teaching being given was a weakness, to their own cause. Mr. J. R. Kirk (Gisl'omo) said it was tho unfortunate subject of Prohibition that was causing dissension in the churches and in families, and now, in election year, it was going to cause dissension in the Education' Council. Mr. Caughley: "That is because it is election year." Mr. Kirk supported neither' the motion' nor the amendment. The council was being dragged into party strife, and for that reason he suggested that both the motion nnd amendment should be withdrawn. Mr. T. U. Wfclls. M.A. (Auckland), supported the amendment. He was nut a total abstainer, but, after having spent a couple of months in America and not seeing a drunkard, well, he was going to vote Prohibition. (Laughter.) The pamphlet could do no harm. THE DIRECTOR'S VIEWS. Tb« Director of Education (Mr. -T. Caughley, M.A.), regretted that, the motion hail been brought forward. The fiSfi?Pjtfs* fed tesS.isfflSd.-fer Ayfi_^§W»&

butl nothing had been heard by way of protest against it until election year. There had not been a word of protest from teachers on tho matter, and the school committees had congratulated the Minister and the Department on the issue of the pamphlet. Mr. Caughley disputed Mr. M'Callum's interpretation of statements in the pamphlet, and contended that it drew a severe distinction between the exce.ssive and moderate use of alcohol. The pamphlet had been so drawn upas to be understood by the children, and he was quite satisfied tint it gave a 'fair presentation of the question. The most that could be said for the pamphlet was that it taught total abstinence. Mr. Caughley criticised what he considered to be the gross misrepresentation of the Moderate League in regard to Pamphlet 13, and said he had never seen anything more extravagant in his life than the statements of the League. He denied that the pamphlet studiously avoided reference to the excessive use of alcohol.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried by 9 votes to 5.