QUESTIONS TO "TRUTH."

NZ Truth, 5 October 1918, Page 3

QUESTIONS TO "TRUTH."

Deai* "Truth,"- 1 -! would be pleased if you would answer the questions I am putting- to you. I am not writing m an antagonistic spirit, but purely to see how, and why, you' stand on them: (1) Why are you so bitter against Prohibition and its advocates? You always denounce them as hypocrites, unpatriotic, extremists and exaggerators. I have a glass myself, but m your criticisms (m my opinion) you are vice versa. Get me? (.2) You denounce that Canadian called Bayley m your paper for his so-called unpatriotic utterances. Yet, on the other hand, you champion Fi'aser; whereas, I think he is as probably just as disloyal as Bayley. lam judging him entirely on his own. statements. Where is your consistency? Don't you see! (3) Can you give me the reason why Canada and the United States have adopted Prohibition? (4) Do you honestly think that if New Zealand carried* Prohibition, it would be a" retrograde step? Or, put m your own literal style, be damned? (5) Don't you think that Protestants are entitled to have an association as well as any other creed? (G) J am a constant reader of "Truth," but 1 have not seen, so far. m your columns anything- m approbation of any moral or social reform undertaken by a Christian church. I may be wrong. I hope I am; but give me an instance where you have come out and patted it on the back. (7) Do you think the present Labor leaders m New Zealand are lit and capable persons of running Parliament if they were returned? Of course, I do not say the leaders of theNational Government ar^>. by any means. They have failed miserably. Trusting I have not bored you and that you will answer these with candor. — Yours, etc., "CAUTIOUS." Featherston M.C. ["Truth" is, and always has been, and will continue to be, a radical and democratic newspaper, conducted on the lines laid down by its deceased proprietor, the late John Norton. The policy laid down •by the late John Norton is being carried out by the trustees of the estate of John Nortoii; and, what is more to the point, the policy of "Truth" is admirably set forth m its motto: Here shall the press the people's right maintain, Unawed by influence and unbribed by gain. Here patriot "Truth" its pious precepts draw, Pledged to religion, liberty, and law. To convince some people is an impossible task. All that "Truth," as a newspaper, does is to give to all questions of the day what it considers to be the radical and democratic points of view, and accordingly, and as briefly as possible, the answers to "Cautious' '■' queries are as follows: (1) We are not bitter against Prohibition and its advocates. Quite the reverse, the advocates of Prohibition are bitter towards "Truth." We do not always denounce the advocates of Prohibition as hypocrites, unpatriotic, extremists and exaggerators. We say that State-control is the solution of a thorny question. We say that Prohibition is wrong, because two polls on.the question revealed the fact that a settled opinion is impossible.-. We believe that State-con-trol lead to the solution, -and the State, that is the people can, under such a system, "turn off the tap." (2) We did not denounce Bayley for his so-called unpatriotic utterances. We said, and repeat, that for such utterances m New Zealand he might have come within the provisions of the War Regulations. We deprecated his sentiments during war-time, and we objected to him blowing hot m one country and cold m another. So far as Fraser is concerned, "we recognised him as the official Labor candidate. As for the cry of disloyalty, we viewed it as an electioneering trick. (3) It might suffice our correspondent if we say that we have yet to learn that Canada and the United States have adopted, the Prohibition which is advocated for New Zealand. (4) If Prohibition became the law of New Zealand, we would be law-abiding, and would insist on obedience to the law. We opposed Conscription. We now insist on obedience to the law. The citizens' duty is to obey; otherwise anarchy would prevail. When the war is over., we will insist on the repeal- of the law. (5) The Protestants are entitled to form an association, but neither Protestants, Catholics, nor apy other denomination are entitled to form organisations which operate to the hurt of the State. We object to P.P.A.-ism, because its lecturer or organiser showed that he was bent on raising sectarian strife. Such is inimical to the country's welfare. Such is almost sedition m the present era. If the Catholic Federation, or any other organisation, created friischief, divided the people, and generally operated contrary to honest citizenship. "Truth" would promptly have its say regardless of whose interests were crossed (C) "Cautious" cannot be a constant reader of "Truth," or he would not ask such a question. Credit is always given where credit is due. (7) We offer no opinion. "Truth" •• is not allied to any religious or political organisation. "Truth" is an independent newspaper, and has always leaned towards sfine Labor. First, and last of a:l. we do not know who the. present leaders of Labor are. — Ed. T.l