PROHIBITION FADS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume VIII, Issue 414, 30 June 1898, Page 16

PROHIBITION FADS.

A letter calculated to produce an unpleasant grin on the countenances of intolerant temperance orators, because the writer uses, very much the same language against tea that the temperance orators employ against spiritous liquor, appeared recently in the Lyttelton Times. The writer states :—“I should like to take tfris opportunity of expressing my protest against the frightful excess of tea drinking, which is so prevalent in our midst. Truly, this form of overdrinking is undermining the constitution of the people of this country. It is an insidious foe to fight. There is no outward sign of the terrible havoc that this form of excess engenders ; chronic dyspepsia, deranged stomachic action, hysteria and nerve troubles generally, are found in the wake of this insidious foe. Like a snake in the grass it lies.” The “ snake in the grass ” simile is delicious, ' and smacks of the oratory of our Isitts and Taylors when shrieking anathemas against strong “ dherrink.” How will they relish it when they find their own pet beverage attacked very much in the spirit which moves them to crush a big industry and one of the chief sources of public revenue. The anti-tea writer continues :—“ The habit (tea drinking) once formed, how difficult to break, and ruined homes, \emapiated forms, a stunted progeny are all the results of this form of ever-growing excess. Can nothing be done to check this frightful waste of life energy ? Cannot some enactment be framed to sweep out of the country this curse to the progress of the race ? ” The writer answers his own query,, and the answer is so brimful of the intolerant spirit of Isitt and Taylor that one would be pardoned for attributing to them the th ft nnn cncti oh of’ it, were it not that it is strong tea, their own beverage, and not strong “ dherrink ” that is inveighed against. The answer which the writer gives to his own query as to how to stop tea drinking is:-—“ Nothing short of prohibiting its introduction into the country will do, for it can be obtained everywhere. There is no check on its sale or consumption; the greedy retailer seeks his profit, and the lives of tens of thousands of our countrymen and women are sacrificed at the altar of the selfish, tea vendor, who encourages the bolstering up of his monopoly at the expense of • those who are too weak minded to realise the golden rule of moderation in all things.” The reference to the “ golden rule of moderation in all things” is surely an. exquisite satire on the Christian spirit of moderation exhibited by prohibitionists, who will, of course, shut their eyes to the lesson which a contemporary draws from the letter quoted above. A slice from a roast leg of mutton is delicious ; if you eat the whole leg you will probably be ill. Shall we, therefore, get |up a crusade against the use of mutton ? and shall we banish tea from the land because some drink to excess? Shall we prohibit coffee because there are coffee drunkards ? Shall we taboo yellow-back novels because many people, especially women, read nothing else? Or, finally, shall we gag public speech because prohibitionists allow their tongues to run riot.