Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19201, 18 June 1924, Page 8

Sir, —I am extremely sorry that my contention about there being a greater evil Uian drink has caused in some quarters the wrong impression that I am an advocate of drink, and, incidentally, of drunkenness. Nothing 'is further from my thoughts. I would welcome all honest efforts to do away with drink consistent with a due observance of the rights of those who take it lor their good without abusing it. Fortunately this class is the great majority. This is liberty according to my ideas of it, and this class has always been a stumbling block to prohibitionists, common, sense being hard to kill I see in Saturday’s Daily Times that “Liberty,’ who attaches a peculiar meaning to the word “liberty,” wants to make our Lord a prohibitionist, because he uses so many "nols” in his teaching. He never, however, says “drink no wine,” nor do the Ten Commandments say “thou shalt drink no wine.” Then your correspondent asserts that drinking was, not such an extensive evil in Christ’s day as it is now an assertion I very much doubt, for Christ Himself wafl called by the Pharisees a wine bibber. But the teaching of Christ was not meant only for the short time He was on earth, but for all time, and if we believe in His divinity we must believe that he saw then the state the world would be in now. That there was poverty in the time of Christ is evident, for we read of Him feeding thousands of hungry pepole. Drink could not have been the cause of this, for, according to ' liberty,” there was no drunkenness to speak of in those days. Then "Liberty” charges me with blundering about temptation and self-denial, and quotes the Lord’s Prayer, or at least the words “Lead us not into temptation.” Now, it will be observed that the prayer does not say “take the temptation away.” It is a prayer for strength to bear and resist temptations. Further, St, James says; "Blessed is the man that, endureth temptation, for he shall receive the crown of life,” Then, as to self-denial, Christ says': “Deny thyself and take up thy cross and follow me.” "Liberty” says the moderate drinker is not subjected to temptation,' for he just takes his glass and leaves it, but how does “Liberty” know that the moderate man is not subject to temptation- Is it not rather that he endures temptation and resists it ior an example and for tho good of others? “Liberty” does not believe in this kind of self-denial. He believes in giving self-denial no chance. Tho drunkard never heeds the voice of conscience, but just obeys his own unholy appetite. Drunkenness should be thought a serious crime, and anyone permitting himself to come under its influence or to become intoxicated is a self-mado lunatic, I would make drunkenness an indictable offence, and punish it as such, not for revenge, but for the drunkard’s own good as a deterrent for himself and also for those that might follow his example, X would inflict the same punishment on those who served a man already under the influence of dnnk. But I would do away with all licenses and place all hotels under State control, in order to do away with all private gam, for a man only takes an hotel to make money, and not for the convenience of the public. If “New Zealander” i a not a sceptic but believes in the * Divine mission of Christ, I think he treats His words in a very manner. “Idealistic” ho calls them, which is another way of calling them maionary 1 only quoted these words, “Love thy God with all thv heart, and thy neighbour as thyseli to show that Christ thought it necessary to add another clause to the Ten Commandments but he did not think it necessary to add “‘thou shall drink no wine. A,s for Christ not supporting the sale of intoxicating drinks, I am not aware that there were licensed houses in His day. If there had been Christ would have been liable to prosecution for making wine as He did at Cana, in Galilee. As for His disciples not making money out of wine, Ho prohibited them from hoarding money by any means ‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth, Be said, “for where your treasure is your heart will be also, and have no thought about to-morrow; vou known not what a day will bring fonth. To “New Zealander” all this will be Utopian. “New Zealander” draws a doleful picture of 6CO 000 feeble-minded, defective children, all the’ result of the alooholic-drinking habits of their parents. I suppose their grand-parents had the same evil habits. Now for the edification of “New Zealander” I will dnaw a picture of the condition of the working class in England when I was a boy. Men working in coal mines would be making about two to three shillings a day. Agricultural labourers had a weekly wage of about nine shillings in the south of England, but in the north, where wages were higher, the average wage would be about 15 shillings. In each case they had a rent-free house or rather hovel, and it was often only a onc-roomed one. Their working hours in the fields were from G a.m to 6 p.m., with an hour for dinner. But as they had horses and often cattie to attend to, they were actually on duty from 5 a.m. till 8 p.m. Their wives and daughters and boys sometimes supplemented thein small earnings by working on the farm at a wage of from sixpence to a shilling per day. These were the days of woman and child labour. I started to work myself when I was nine years old for sixpence a day. There was therefore not much time for schooling and there was no free schools. Such schools as there were consisted generally of a one-roomed old thatched disused cottage, and the teachers were untrained and incompetent—some old men or women that had been failures at something else. Some few of the fathers of the generation I belonged to could read and write and do small simple arithmetical sums, but there were many that could neither read or write, ft would be quite correct to call them all illiterate. Books they had none, except a Bible, a prayer book, and perhaps a copy of Bunyan’s “Pilgrims’ Progress” anil Burns’s poems. Newspapers they seldom saw. Some of them might go to church on a Sunday morning and be regaled with a sermon on their duty to their masters, and in the averting pay a visit to the village publichouse, for hotels were open on Sundays in England, and gel drunk on a penn’orth of ale —a sum they could very ill afford. How their drinking could affect their children 1 fail to see, but it was a fine environment to bring a family up in. Dairwin savs in effect that long-continued habit in a few generations becomes hereditary. What kind of habits would there likely to be in an environment like this? What kind of habits would it produce? The children were starved physically, mentally and spiritually. Need we wonder then, that wc have now so many weak-minded children, the progeny of those that had to live under such conditions? If these conditions obtained now in New Zealand I would have no difficulty in predicting what some of oun descendants would be in the future.—l am, etc., A. Irwin. East Taieri, June 14.