NO-LICENSE AND THE GOSPEL OF THE SWORD

Otago Witness, Issue 2856, 9 December 1908, Page 88

NO-LICENSE AND THE GOSPEL OF THE SWORD

By Thos. J. Pembertox. " But whatever is touched with tho sword ifi never again wholly common; | whatever is touchea with it takes a magic i form outside the world." In these words we find the gospel of the sword. Now that the battle of the local option poll is over partisans may become critics. We may leave the serried ranks in which we have fought and view the field and examine the tactics. That there should be opportunity for tense, heartfelt controversy in these dull civilised days is cause for much rejoicing. " It is a blessing which few seem to realise. People 1 are so taken up with visions of over- - whelming victories that they forget the supreme privilege they -enjoy in having something more responsive than windmills to tilt at. It is a wise government which has provided its people with tourney grounds and set the contest, the while it governs unharassed; and wiser still to have ensured a somewhat even combat by. the handicap of the three-fifths majority.' In view of the fact that the despairing cry of "bare majority" has already been raised since the poll, and newspapers, those guardians of the people's sanity, bay« been subjected to- prejudiced criticism, the doctrine of tight for the fight's sake may be a useful antidote. War is -justifiable when it is for that which claims to be the happiness of man or the virtue of man, but for an idea, a something stronger than sorrow or joy — all that is contained in the word "patriotism," for instance — it is not only justifiable, but commendable. The South African war was right, and just in the light in which it was presented at the time, , though we are learning now that the ' cause was greed, and the war was a wicked blunder. How much more justifiable, then, is the no-license war, since it purports to le for the good of humanity, even though it may be a steo back into the dark ages. Then, on the other hand, if it is not too startling, may we not say what a truly heroic defence the active advocates of license put forward. Why? Because they ar«j fighting for a cause 1 which, on the surface, appears to have very little moral ground for support. Because they are fighting upon a democratic basis — appealing to the superficial in men and women who are not capable of profound thought, to decide a question which requires a philosophic mind to even partly understand it, to say nothing of arriving at a right and proper decision concerning it. If it be granted that nolicense is against the highest moral in* terests of New Zealand, all the statistics of Maine and the well-worn platftudes that are thrust upon the people will do little to prove that fact, though they may prejudice the public mind to such an extent as to render the country an unfit place for the no-license experiment. Democracy is yet on its trial, and democratic suasion is often necessarily dishonest. If by a deep philosophical treatise, we could prove the inadequacy of no-license in this country, it would be necessary, in order to gain the ear and the vote of the people, to set this treatise entirely aside, and appeal to them through the medium of their taste for alcohol and a few well-known arguments. When we speak of license we refer, of course, to a better regulated system than we have, for at present the trade itself, rather than others, is driving the nails into its coffin. Then, again, in the case of the vast body of no-license voters, their votes are cast on the grounds of general morality. There is the chance that the machinery with which the Government his provided us to mark our opinion of the licensing system may be used merely to mark disapproval of drunkenness. That* it is so cannot for a moment be denied. However this may be, the fact remains that the subject might be studied by both sides from the broad theoretical point of view with profit. There are in our local library some half-dozen books by experts on the subject, most of them showing signs of having been scrupulously ignored, and this is a criterion of the amount of study indulged in by the voting public upon a subject of such vital importance. These facts all go to prove that we are fighting for an "idea," and not for a self-evident fact. And here is where the gospel of the sword applies. Were we fighting for the exact locality of a country's boundary or the tax upon lace it would be> better to end the war with as little expenditure of energy as possible. But in the case of the "idea" it is different. The war makes the idea, and the longer the war and the more earnest the fight* the grander and nobler the idea becomes. The fight itself is greater than the aim as it could at present take shape in the larger towns ; and a wise providence demands that the energy " expended should be commensurate with the end attained. The idea put into action 20 years ago would have been a farce, the idea put into action at the present would still smack of comedy, but the idea put into action, weighted with the keen intellectual and spiritual energy of a generation, and perfected by the constant touch of the sword will crystallise into a wonderful and abiding reality.' If we could but realise the law that no energy is lost, whether it be physical t>v the moral energy expended upon an abstract idea, there would be no cry for the bare majority vote ; all fair democratic methods, in so much as they can b^ fair, for the advocacy of license would be a standard to educate th« people up to and beyond ; and the newspapers, whose policy it is for the inosf part to strike the average of public opinion, would be honoured for the restraining influence they exercise. A 1 boxer trains with the aid of a punch 1 ball ; if he struck out against the air he would probably dislocate his shoulder. One feature of the campaign, is especially,

worthy of note. Whereas the No-Jicense party are aggressive, each person doing his part in laying siege, the large army of license voters are merely passive resisters. Their hired generals do the fighting. This lays them open / to the accusation that they are merely defending their beer or their freedom. Now, as such freedom spells slavery to those who have given up the use of alcohol, it is very evident that neither of those battle cries will do much towards proselytising in the ranks of the No-hcense party. Yet there are other arguments seldom put forward by the license leaders and never* by the man in the street, but which carry infinitely more weight than Cie common democratic vote catchers now employed. Even if these did not check yhe onward march of the No-license army, they would at least demand the exercise of more energy and science, and draw greater numbers into the front rank fighting line. And on the license side they would raise the contest to an intellectual one, instead of a fight for vested interests. If we turn what began as a fanatic's wild dream into a crusade : if We raise the tone of the contest and -force the action into the proper field : if we compel the people to think and make the movement world-wide; we crystallise a doubtful idea into an incontrovertible fact. This then is the gospel of the sword. Has it any bearing npon the no-license movement?