THE PREMIER ON THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11581, 20 February 1901, Page 6

THE PREMIER ON THE LIQUOR QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, Will you kindly allow me, as a member of the Citizens' Committee for the reception of the Imperial troops, to utter my strong protest against the remarks made by the Premier at the officers' luncheon on Saturday last, as reported by you in this morning's Herald. On every ground those remarks were in the worst possible taste. The Government authorities having invited the Imperial troops to New Zealand, had it in their power, as the real hosts of the visitors, to make what provision they deemed proper for their entertainment. Instead of that they east the burden of entertainment on the citizens in the various places visited. Right nobly have the citizens everywhere' responded to the demand thus irregularly made upon them. But having abdicated their functions as hosts, the authorities have no right whatever to complain of the particular form of entertainment decided upon by the Citizens' Committee. In two places in New —Wellington and Aucklandthe committee decided that every demand of genuine hospitality could bo met without providing intoxicating liquors. In the ethics of good manners, in the knowledge of what is due to courtesy and good fellowship, those committees may claim to be not one whit inferior to the Hon. Richard Seddon himself. They had the most excellent reasons for the stand they took. They had before them the strong words of the greatest soldiers of the age, Lord Roberts, Lord Woheley, and Lord Kitchener, 'with regard to the wrong and mischief of offering the soldiers drink. They knew, too, what deplorable results had followed where the strong wish of these military leaders had been disregarded, and they resolved that they would be no parties to the possibility of such disgraceful scenes as had. been -witnessed elsewhere. Both in Wellington and Auckland the Government insulted and defied the committee by forcing on the men ilio drink that the committee had decided, by an c\erwhelming majority, should not be furnished. Not content with that, the Premier must needs degrade what should have been a festive and harmonious occasion, to the purpose of abusing the committee in Auckland for carrying out the wish of the highest military authorities. Let anyone read the letter from Lord Wolseley, which you published today, and compare that with the report of Mr. Seddon's speech, and he will surely not I)© long in deciding as to whether the committee or Mr. Seddon most correctly interpreted the proper mode of treating our military visitors, as indicated by the late Commander-in-Chief of the British Army. What, too, are the views of Colonel CroleWyndham, who is in command of the Imperial troops? When aeked in Wellington if he had any special request respecting his men, he at once said, " I hope no one in their kindness will give the men drink." Another officer of the Imperial troops told a member of the Wellington committee that the committee had acted quite properly in deciding not to supply drink, and that it was not true, as had been stated, that the men were accustomed to take liquor with their meals. He also ridiculed the idea that had been put forth by our Cabinet Minister, " that if beer were not provided the men would protest uproariously." With facts like these before them, does Mr. Seddon imagine that the Auckland committee will sit tamely under his fulminations of abuse for not supplying liquor? Mr. Seddon says: " I am a Britisher." Does he suppose that there are no Britishers on the committee, who have backbone enough in them to resent the dictatorial insolence of one who happens to be ''dressed in a little brief authority?" There is every disposition to render becoming respect to Mr. Seddon in the high office he fills as Premier'of the colony, and to recognise the unsparing devotion of his undoubted abilities to secure the advancement of the oolony. But when he so far forgets what is due to the dignity of his position as to use a public occasion to flout those who differ from him on the liquor question, he must be told very plainly that that is a kind of treatment against which men with British blood in them will rise up in indignant protest.—l am, etc., Wji. Jas. Williams. February 18, 1901.