The Poole Telegram. — 1882-03-31 (Poole, Dorset, England)

INTEMPERATE" TEMPERANCE." To the Editor.  Sir,—No one who has the welfare of his fellow men at heart can read in the public papers the daily record of crimes, directly or indirectly, attributable to the abuse of alcoholic drink, without wishing to do all in his power to reduce the so-celled "national" crime of drunkenness. It must therefore be with deep regret that such an one reads the intemperate speeches which are frequently made in the name of temperance at meetings such as those held last week in the Bournemouth Winter Garden. Those who value truth even more than teetotalism must ever find it impossible to ce-operate with men who bolster up a cause which requires no such fictitious aid with slander sod falsehood; and when men in the posit:on of Canon Wilbertorce descend to the use of such lenguage se is attributed to him in the rspert of his speech at that meeting, it is no wonder if the small fry of teetotal stump-orators indulge in—if possible—still grosser epithets for those who do not agree with them in their condemnation of the mooerate use of alcoholic liquors. We cannot but remember that if the Decalogue contains no special commandment against Intemperance, it does contain the conanaudment 'Thou shalt uut bear false witness against thy neighbour," and I fail to see that such au accusation as Canon Wilberforce brings against the veneors ot alcoholic liquors is rendered any less a breach of this command by his somewhat hypocritical preface that "he had not one unkind word to sae of them." He is reported to have sai I that the trade itself "is devilish,' and that men (meaning, I presume, brewers, distillers of spirits, and importers of wine) are sent to Parliament "who have built up colossal fortunes out of the misery and destitution of their brethren, and whose every guinea is spotted with the blood of widows and orphans." He is here apoarectly not speaking of those who conduct an illegitimate trade in liquor, either by its adulteration or by fixing it in excessive quantities upon customers, as may be dote by some publicans, but he applies, if I understand him, this gross calumny to the whole trade. Canon Wilberforce thus places himself in the dilemma, that either he must, with numerous infidel teetotalers condemn alcoholic liquor in itself and pronounce its use to be sinful, which involees nothing short of blasphemy against Him who, in His own words "came eating and drinking," or if he admit that it is permissible to follow the divine example, he must be guilty of the grossest injustice in condemning those who are in that case engaged in legitimate trade, for to admit that the use of it is lawful, and yet t • make the vendors responsible for its abuse is no whit less preposterous than to charge wet murder the chemist who sold to Dr. Lamson the aconituae with which he committed the crime, for which that wretched man is condemned to the gallows ; or to say that the money of chemists in general is stained with the blood of murdered men or miserable suicides, because the poisonous drugs they vend are thus abused; or again to make the gunsmiths responsible for the crimes of Irish assassins. It is a remarkable fact that as though with a view to the teetotal heresy of the present day, our Lord not enly Himself used wine, but by a special miracle actually made it for the marriage feast when the supply ran short, thus for ever giving His sanction and approbation to the producers of alcoholic liquors. I am not desirous of entering into a defence of the moderate use of alcoholic drinks, but will only observe that beyond question numbers of persons have injured their health (same fatally) by total abstinence, and that I if it be a sin to injure the health by excess, it may at least be open to question whether it be not equally a sin to do so by abstinence—a view which appears confirmed ,by the admonition of St. Paul to Timothy. I have confined myself to one quotation from Caton Wilbur' force's speech, but before closing I will give one more, as to which I will leave it to your readers to judge, whether it be not something more than a breach of good taste, to give expression to such an implication as is involved in it, before a mixed audience, and at a meeting convened for the promotion of temperance. He is reported to have said, "The first thing they "(the clergy oif the people "had to do was to put themselves on the side of England in all their trials and sufferings, and in all the oppression, the robbery and the wrong that was heaped upon them."—l am, sir, your obedient servant, H. RADCLYFFE DuMORL The Lodge, Parkstone, March 20th, 1882.  BOI7RNBXOtf