MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND THEIR DUTIES.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIX, Issue 1101, 18 May 1911, Page 20

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND THEIR DUTIES.

MR. POOLE, M.P., ON THE STUMP. THE CHRISTCHURCH SLUMP. Mr- C. H. Poole, M.P., is again on the stump in the interests of the “NoLicense” movement. Since “the first shot” was fired at Wanganui, it is indeed doubtful if the elect of Auckland West has. save for the brief respite afforded by the East Coast Railway excursion trip, ceased to raise his voice on behalf of the Prohibition movement. He is said to have been much in evidence at Wanganui, Feilding and other North Island centres, and now be would appear to have crossed over the Cook Straits and to be reasoning with the unregenerate of Christchurch. We gather as much from a telegram (sent by that most reliable of agencies, the Press Association), from the City of the Canteibury Plains on Friday. Another first shot” would appear to have been fired that evening, with Mr- Poole as the chief gunner of the National Prohibition movement, bringing all his heavy artillery to bear upon an audience that was disappointingly small, and to which the local organiser, a Mr. Payne, made a sort of ad misericordium appeal for funds to keep Mr. Poole, or somebody else, on the road. According to this Mr. Payne, whose feelings were reflected by his name, the funds for the campaign are in “a low state,” and the state of the funds evidently affected Mr. Payne’s feelings. because we are told he “expressed disappointment at the smallness of the attendance, which he considered an indication of apathy on the part of the Christchurch. public.” Mr. Poole thereupon found it necessary to rally his pessimistic friend upon his lack of faith, pointing out that it was still early in the campaign and they had a long way to go. He had, he declared, “seen other causes, with apparently no greater enthusiasm at that early stage, carried to. a triumphant conclusion when the time came for it. He expressed the opinion that the outlook in New Zealand generally was” good, and urged that the result of the coming poll would never foe in dou/bt if the public, who stood for the moral uplifting of the country would stand shoulder to shoulder,” and so on. MR. POOLE’S POSITION. There is, of course, no reason why Mr. Poole should not travel around the country to impress his own particular views upon the people. But we think the public generally is entitled to an explanation of Mr- Poole’s position in regard to the “No-License” movement. The member for Auckland West has been engaged since Christmas practically, in the special campaigning business undertaken by the New Zealand Alliance. With Mr. T. E. Taylor, M.P., as his boon com-

pariion and friend, he has travelled here, there, and everywhere—not enlightening the public upon the condition of political affairs generally, but dealing with a special phase and movement in the life of the people, that occupies far too large a place in the sphere of general politics, hindering as it does the settlement of questions of even graver national concern. Whether Mr. Poole’s constituents approve of his conduct . in this respect, is a question which time and the ballot box can alone tell. But on general grounds the wisdom of Mr. Poole’s action may well be challenged. He is in Parliament to represent the wishes of his constituents, and to do his best to represent every section of the community. Is he doing so by practically confining his time and attention to the one propaganda? It is certain that a very considerable proportion of his constituents are in complete disagreement with that propaganda. And surely their wishes have a right to be considered. Mr. Poole has apparently taken up the role of an itinerating Prohibitionist lecturer and propa-

gandist. He has given up the auctioneering business in which he was engaged in Auckland last year, and, unless he is being paid for his services by the Prohibition party, he is dependent upon his allowance of £3OO per annum as a member of Parliament. What the public has a right to know, under such circumstances (Mr. Poole being practically a servant of the people), is the consideration, if any, that is being paid by the Prohibition party for Mr. Poole’s services. As a paid propagandist his enthusiasm in the cause is understandable. But it is very questionable whether Mr. Poole’s constituents would approve of his carpet-bagging oratory if they really understood the position. * # * MR. POOLE’S PROPAGANDA. Mr. Poole claims to be engaged in a movement, for the “moral uplifting” of the people. If to be concerned in a propaganda that has for its objective the further restriction of the liberties of the people, and the introduction of a system of needless interferences on the part of the authorities in the lives and homes of the people, constitutes a “moral uplifting” movement , then nothing remains to be said on the subject- But we believe it to be otherwise, and in that belief we are supported by thousands and tens of thousands of the people of

this country. There are certain craving"' in human nature that must find satisfaction, and that have done so, from the days of Adam, down to the present age. Certain perfectly lawful and legitimate appetites must be appeased. Hunger and thirst alike require to he satisfied and will find satisfaction either lawfully or unlawfully. Because there are gluttons and those who dunk to excess in the world are we all to be debarred from using certain forms of food ard drink? Is it reasonable, right, or just, that we should be. There are hundreds of thousands of people—millions indeed, who take their wine in moderation and enjoy it as one of the good things sent to us by a Bountiful Providence. Why should their use of good, healthful liquors be debarred, because certain frothy Temperance lecturers and Prohibitionists declare them to foe “rank poison,” and consequently baneful and injurious in their effects. The old proverb that what is one man’s food, is another man’s poison, is just as true of tea and coffee as it is of alcoholic liquors. One man may take and enjoy with

impunity that which another man is bound to leave severely alone. But because the one man has to leave it alone, that is surely no reason why the other man should be compelled to do so also. The compelling or restraining influence is bad. It prompts retaliation and evasion. When the law declares a thing to foe wrong that our own moral sense tells. us is perfectly legitimate, we cease to respect the law, and ceasing to respect do not hesitate to break it. Under the principle Mr. Poole advocates, other laws might well be introduced that even Mr. Poole and those associated with him would refuse to obey. The weakness of the prohibitory law in regard to the use of stimulants is that it brands as criminal actions that should be perfectly legitimate and. lawful, and that it consequently (when the prohibition is applied to liquor), creates the sly-groggery and a host of other evils that would be impossible under a properly regulated trading system.