A CONTRAST IN EMPIRES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18676, 4 October 1922, Page 8

A CONTRAST IN EMPIRES

TO THE EDITOR. Sin.—There can doubtless be many arguments raised in favour of the delightful delirium produced by « Hltle alcohol; but the case of Alexander the Great, raised by' a correspondent at Kurow, seems badly chosen. Alexander’s career was ruined and much needless privation and suffering- were brought upon his followers through his drunkenness. Under the influence of drink, i with his own hands, at the suggestion of a woman, believed also to be delirious, ho set fire to tire wonderful palace of Persepolis, a place j'ichpr in treasure than even Babylon or Susa. In the same condition he murdered his childhood’s playfellow and lifelong friend, who had once saved his life. Having brought his army right into India, ho there, inflamed with drink, died of fever at the early age of 31. His army, practically without a leader, became a prey to contending generals, and his empire went to the dogs. Those few surviving Greeks who were forced to find a home so far from their native land had some influence on the people around them: bnt, had Alexander been a prohibitionist, the whole expedition would not have ended as it did in dismal failure. Very different is the case of the empire founded by the prohibitionist camel driver, which, a few generations later, swallowed up the whole empire of Alexander, and which, according to the cablegrams in this morning's paper, is still going strong.”— I am, etc., ' Moderate Man. Dunedin, September 28. PROHIBITION LAIN. TO THE EDITOE. Sir,— Permit me a brief reply to “M.” and ‘Nrv, l Zealander.” Replying to "M.” I am not prepared to turn my house into a ‘‘miniature brewery.” There is no comparison between making a few gallons o! health-producing hop beers, etc., in your home lor your own use and owning a brewery. As for the manufacture of alleged ‘'non-intoxicating wines,” I refer your correspondent to Passing Notes by "Civis” in your issue of September 23, It will mako good reading for “M.” as it has done for others. “New Zealander" will find that the people will not vole as strongly this time for the prohibition issue as they did in 1919. They are awake to the outrageous tyranny sought to be imposed on them in the manner I have indicated, and they, will not support the cause aa the law now stands. By your courtesy, Mr Editor, I have been permitted to stale my views and to bring my facts before your readers. Your correspondents have admitted them, hut have tried to cloud the issue by irrelevant remarks which ihe public will not be slew to note. Having been allowed to ventilate, my v.ews, to.- which I thank you, I how retiro liom further correspondence on the subject. —I am, etc , , Indignant Prohibitionist.