THE RIGHT SORT OF TEETOTALER.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIX, Issue 1090, 26 January 1911, Page 22

THE RIGHT SORT OF TEETOTALER.

LIBERTY TO ALL. . The fiat has gone forth that the City of London-is to have a teetotal Mayor next year, and this for the first time in its history, extending over 7 00 years. The gentleman who has been elected to the office is Sir Vezey Strong. No doubt he is proud of the fact that he will break a record. The Trade can have no objection to the teetotaler as such. England is a free country, and every citizen is entitled to exercise his liberty in the matter of his appetites and his opinions, but that liberty does not allow him to force his personal views upon others. The new Lord Mayor has been interviewed by a member of “The Leader” stall, and has frankly stated to that gentleman, how he will comport himself in his office when he is installed in it., It is interesting to place on record his answers to the pointed questions, which the Press representative put to him as to the way in which , he would carry out his own principles in the exercise of his Mayoral duties. It is Quite evident from his statements that he is determined not to be guilty of any personal inconsistency, but, whilst acting on his own individual rights on every occasion, he will allow the same liberty to others. Asked, how he would drink the King’s health on festive occasions, Sir Vezey said he should do this “in such innocent liquids as happen to be at hand. King Edward,” he pointed out, “expressly authorised, through an official communication, the drinking of his health in any non-intoxi-cating -liquid; and King George V.,” he rurther added, “very early in his reign gave his permission to follow the practice.” .During his year of office Sir Vezey stated that he would entirely and absolutely abstain, but as for others he would never presume to dictate to those of mature age and equal or superior intelligence to himself what they should drink or eat. “They will therefore,” he continued, “enjoy the same liberty as I claim for myself, and wines and other liquids will be provided for them. I have always acted in the same way in my own house.” These answers are in every way satisfactory, and though our creed is we think much wider and more rational than that which Sir Vezey, professes, we can ...offer no objections to a presentation of such views of personal liberty and right as he holds. Moreover, he states his views with a sane and. for professors of his cult, a most unusual humility. We imagine he owes the great honour he is to attain as much by his tolerance of ether opinions as by the consistent practice of his own. Something is alsi to he credited to a courage that marks, out its own course of public action without seeking to invalidate the practice of others who have quite different opinions. Teetotalism would cease to be obnoxious if it were everywhere marked by the same shrewdness and tolerance. By such provisions Temperance itself would suffer less injury, and would cease

to be regarded as a merely political instrument divorced from true morality. Sir Vezey has publicly declared that he will not abuse his high office in such a manner 'as to use it as a coign of vantage from which to declare the apostleship Of a distraught. rigorism. Allow to others that toleration which you expect them to allow to you, is his motto. Apparently he is as stout an exponent of personal liberty as we are ourselves. He is not of that class which would traverse earth and sea to make the proselyte. In his private as in his public life he enunciates-One principle, and his personal views do not exclude the practice of their ’• views by other people. We have heard of new converts to a segemental morality on their adoption of teetotal views pouring whatever they might have of ■ alcoholic liquors, Winesi, ales, spirits, etc., down the drains—an example of wanton prodL gal waste, if nothing else. The same class —we hope a limited numberrefuse to put before their guests any beverages which they consider to be deleterious in their, own case. Their pledges they think bind them to “touch not’, . taste not, handle not.” Sir Vezey publicly declares that he offers no affront to h’s private guests,' neither will he to those he entertains in his ■ public capacity. The duties of a mayoralty carried out in this spirit cannot but- be discharged in a manner which will be extolled by all ranks and conditions of citizens. We are free to confess we have no prejudice against teetotalers of such professions and practices. We consider Sir Vezey as an example of the right sort of teetotaler. He does-not consider he is so infallibly right that he can seek to coerce others into his own way of thinking and acting as the extreme zealots who will probably be shocked asbhis frank professions of toleration; “The Licensing World.” .