THE New Zealand Herald. SPECTEMUR AGENDO. TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1576.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XIII, Issue 4484, 28 March 1876, Page 2

THE New Zealand Herald. SPECTEMUR AGENDO. TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1576.

In" our columns lately have appeared a ; good many letters in reference to the i Bqiior traffic, all of them advocating that < the law should deal with the trade, more ' stringently than it does. And, indeed, ' when one reflects upon the amount of j crime and degradation which seem to be ' caused by drink, and the records of J which appear so startling in our Police 1 Court reports and otherwise, it is difficult j to restrain the wish that the strong hand < of the law could be to bear on c the sale of liquor, so that it might not b* i obtainable by those who cannot control i themselves while under its influence, t

Butj'-'b'esides the fact thatjexperience has it is imposSißle, eveA under -■favourable circujnstaflC?3.NtcNjprevenJ v yxe,j eaie""6f-spirits, we dispute! tHerrigMVta - the tq'i enforce their wiH«in.f-;sucK';a [inatter! OuPcorrespondent, that society is entitled "to" ptdhibif'air:iadulgence in liquor because " the whole of the°Pepalogue goes upon the loud-toned declaration shalt nbt;' :,,, -It" might be answered to this that the Decalogue forbids some things which merely human law cannot -.touch, and speaks with a higher I sanction than .can be claimed by any Legislature _here. The Decalogue says : —"Thou shall not covet thy neighbour's house," <fcc; and, of course, we all endeavour, however ineffectually, to comply ••-ith the command. We cannot see the analogy which Mr. Newman would seek to institute between compulsory legislation for the sale of liquor and the authority of the Decalogue, and he must admit that so far ass there is an argument in Scripture it is against him, seeing that to drink in moderation is nowhere spoken against there, but, indeed, is rather commended. The drunkard is denounced for having yielded to a degrading vice, but the wine-seller is nowhere blamed. And Mr. Newman must admit that the compulsory legislation which some would introduce would interfere with a great deal of that moderate drinking which the Scriptures do not prohibit. Mr. Newman further says : —"To be consistent, you should move for all restrictions to be removed from the sale of poisons." There are at present wholesome restrictions put upon the sale of poisons in order to . prevent crime from being directly committed, but the Legislature has never proposed to prohibit altogether the sale of poisons. The Legislature may justifiably interfere to prevent crime, but it is a very different matter to endeavour to extinguish vicej and to prohibit the indulgence, of tastes which may be indulged without any vice at all. Mr. Newman evidently] considers that, because, many men ruin themselves and their families >by drink, the State should interfere, and further, that the seller of the liquor should be held responsible, and should be made to pay the fine incurred by the drunkard, if taken by the police.. "Wβ think that even Mr. I Newman will admit that the argument is unsound when he/fcries t-o apply the same process , of reasoning to other circumstances. !Torinstance,notafewhaveruined themselves by share speculations, andhave brought their families to beggary. "Would our correspondent prohibit the profession of sharebroking, and brand all sharebrokers as infamous because of what had taken place. It is a common thing to hear abstainers speak of publicans as tempting men, and of the Government as licensing places for temptation. To keep to the!instance we have chosen, we have heard'that sharebrokers not expatiate temptingly-on the investments they present. And yet no one would think of punishing a sharebroker, even where it could be shewn that he had directly tempted to indulge in the vice of speculation—a vice as dangerous as that of drinking. "We have the highest respect for the motives of Good Templars, but we believe they soil their cause in seeking to substitute for.moral suasion the prohibitory legislation for which Mr. Newman craves. There is not an argument in his lottor that would not, logically applied, justify a political crusade against all or any of the sins, vanities, weaknesses, and excesses of this wicked world. The cure of drunkenness is a great moral question. No legal pains or penalties can advance it, or, in our opinion, convert a single drunkard into a sober man. ♦ — The Superintendent of Napier wants to do something which he cannot do without the consent of the Provincial Council, and as he will not venture to fly in the face of the General Government so far as to call the Council together, he adopts the novel plan of consulting the councillors by letter. He has issued the following circular :— [CUICULJLR.] Superintendent's Office, Napier, March 14,187G.— Sir,—l have lately received a number of applications from bond fide intending settlers, desirous of taking land in this province on deferred payments, and as the available laud in tile blocks already set aside under tho Special Settlement Act, 1572, is absorbed, I propose, with a view of promoting settlement in the province, to set aside about five thousand (5000) acres of land in tho vicinity of Woodville; for occupation under the provisions of the Special Settlement Act, 1572." As one of the provisions of that Act is that the Superintendent may, with tho consent of the Provincial Council, set aside land for settlement, and as Provincial Councils are, by recent legislation, debarred from sitting, I now usk, by circular the consent of the members of the Provincial Council s° n »? se "ing aside land not exceeding fire thousand (ouOO) acres for the before-mentioned purpose I feel satisUed that the members of tbo Provincial Council will readily assent to this proposal, and so recognise the importance of the subject, and tho absolute necessity of promoting the settlement of tho people on tho land.—l have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant, J. D. Omiond, Superintendent. Supposing that each member of the Council answers that he 13 willing to do just what the Superintendent pleases, can Mi-. Ormond take that as the legal consent of the Hawke's Bay Provincial Council ? We doubt very much whether the law' will bear him out; but, probably, Ministers will undertake, or, indeed, they may have already undertaken, to see him out of any difficulty. We can hardly think that Mr. Ormond Las adopted this course without the consent of the Ministry, as he has usually acted in his office of Superintendent in cordial agreement with them ; but, if so, they have sanctioned a dangerous precedent. We heard some weeks ago aboxit a petition which was being signed, asking the Superintendent of Otago to con° reiie the Council of that province; but Mr. Macandrew might very much simplify matters by sending round a circular, and getting the consent of the members to acts which would seriously embarrass the General Government, and Sir George Grey might very easily take the same course. The provision preventing the Councils from meeting was passed chiefly for the purpose of preventing dealings with provincial lands which might be injurious to the colony when the provinces were taken over. Tet it is in respect to this very point that Mr. Ormond proposes to act, getting the consent of his Provincial Council by a circular sent round privately to its members.

"A Settler" writes to.,us in approval of what has appeared in our paper lately about the neglect of the Government in' opening the lands at the Thames. Our correspondent gives us particulars respecting an alleged transaction in native lands at the Upper Thames, by a Government officer; but, if we are not mistaken, the same transaction was a subject of discussion some years ago, and was then fully put before the public. Last session, as our correspondent will remember, the position of the lands in the extensive valleys of the Thames and Piako engaged a large share of attention, and we have no doubt that the matter will be thoroughly gone into in the next session. Some four or five years ago a proclamation was issued, preventing any private dealing in land at the Thames. Previous to that, certain claims had, we believe, been acquired over land in that district, and we are quite sure that no public opposition would be made to any fair settlement of old-standing claims. We believe, for instance, that it would be for the advantage of the province that the exchange of

land wliicii the to make withiMr. Whitaker should b v e s fiiiisKedJ'which clo -with an obstacle which "seriously impedes the country ,-for settlement. however, *of renewed attempta'to'complicate the posi,tion of the lands in the"iXJpper Thames;'■; and "!if such''attempts are being made/tne-Govern-ment ought to resistthem, and'should endeavour to acquire the lands as soon as possible, removing restrictions which may hinder the agent employed from bringing"those landsJ-'-