Newspaper Page Text
VOL 2.—NO. 7.
Canada’s High Hopes.
There is little doubt that the day of
national prohibition for Canada is
swiftly approaching. Indeed, if any
reliance can be placed upon admis
sions formally made in behalf of the
government of the conserva
tive government, by the way —nation-
al prohibition might be granted with
out longer delay, but for the obstacle
of the $7,500,000 liquor revenue.
This revenue would be wiped out if
the license system were abandoned,
and the question with which the
government meets all demands for
prohibitory law is, how w ill you re
place the $7,500,000 that we derive
from the liquor traffic and that is
necessary to our support f Serious
though this question may be, the pro
hibitionists of the United States and
every other country must recognize
that the practical disappearance of
every other serious objection indicates
that the cause has reached an excep
tionally advanced stage in the Do
minion. Adverse votes in parliament
are no longer based essentially upon
arrogant denial of the soundness of
the prohibition policy, professed be
lief in the superiority of certain sys
tems of license and regulation, solici
tude for the right of personal liberty,
advocacy of compensation, or any of
the other elementary reasons that are
so stolidly adhered to and so hard to
overcome in the United States. Of
course these reasons still have some
weight in Canada, but even the poli
ticians have about realized that thev
are illogical and unavailable practi
cally. The prohibitory programme is
now accepted seriously by all, and the
disposition to consider the question
on its merits is becoming general.
Thus it is seen from the practical ex
perience of this nation that the reve
Due argument is the final resort of
the foes of prohibition, and also the
final obstacle to the acceptance of
prohibition by disinterested people.
The honest supporters of high license
as a step toward prohibition are dis
appearing.
Since .the present session of parlia
ment began, the issue of national
prohibition has occupied much of its
attention. Necessarily the demand
for actual enactment of a measure o f
national prohibition has been ap
proached by degrees and with cau
tion. The champions of the move
ment in parliament have striven for
accessions rather than for downright
legislation, and partial successes in
former years have opened the way for
the real struggle. The ordinary
methods of working for the great ob
ject have been used with much bettor
results by the Canadians than by their
southern neighbors. This is probably
duo to more fortunate conditions
rather than to better generalship or
greater perseverance; and it does not
imply that the sterner methods of
political warfare which have been
found necessary in the United States
are to be regarded as any the less ju
dicious because of Canadian experi
ence. Indeed, many' shrewd obser
vers here are convinced that the
triump would have been hastened if a
separate prohibition party had been
instituted years ago; and ono of the
most powerful influences in the pres
ent agitation is afforded by the activi
ty of independent party prohibitionists
and the certainty that neither of the
leading parties can ignore the ques
tion without having to meet a formid
able revolt at the polls. The differ
ent conditions of which I have spoken
have, however, enabled the workers
to gain encouragement by natural
rather than extraordinary means.
There has not been a solid concentra
tion of the liquor vote and influence;
the strength of the rutn element in
the cities caunot compare with that
of the temperance element in the
country; this rum element, therefore,
has not been an irresistible balance of
power in a national sense; the people,
as a whole, are far more temperate
than those of the United States, as
comparative returns of consumption
of liquor demonstrate. In conse
quence of these and other circum
stances, political discussion of the
question on its merits has not been
effectually suppressed; and, what is
of the greatest practical significance,
free speech has not been throttled in
parliament. In the United 'States,
where the rum-ruled congress has suf
fered no representative national dis
cussion of the subject to be heard, the
prohibitionists can appreciate the im
mense advantage of these earnest de
bates in the Dominion parliament and
of the gradual creation of a strong
prohibition following in that bod\ r .
A notable deputation of prohibi
tionists wated upon tlio government
at Ottawa the other day. Besides the
chief officials of the national temper
ance organizations—the Sons of Tern
peratico, Good Templars, Royal Tem
plars of Temperance, and Woman’s
Christian Temperance Union—there
were present representatives of a
number of the leading religions de
nominations. The Methodist general
conference was represented bv Rev.
Dr. Ryckman, and others; the Presby
terian church by Rev. W. I). Morris
on, and others; the Congregational
church by W. A. Lamb and C. G.
Bowers, M. P. Adjutant Walder
spoke for the Salvation Army. All
the clergymen declared that the de
nominations to which they were at
tached were uncompromising in urg
ing rigid national prohibition. The
arguments were listened to with clone
attention By Mr. Bo well and Mr. Fos
ter, members of the cabinet who had
been selected by the government to
receive the deputation and reply for
mally. Their responses ware full of
significance.
Minister Bowell said that there
was no member of the government
who did not recognize the importance
of the prohibition question, but that
they also recognized the difficulties in
tho way. He added that if prohibi
tion was ever carried it would have t
he by the united action of the two
parties iu parliament.
Minister Foster spoke at. greater
length and with more definiteness.
He said that lie had been very much
impressed with the representations
made. He did not take any stock at
all in the criticisms that had been
made in reference to the character of
the petitions presented to the house.
He was not going to give his reasons
pro and con in regard to the action
he proposed to take in this matter
until it came to his turn to speak on
the question m the house, lfo pro
posed to be perfectly honest with
himself and the country in whatever
action Ire took, and they might be
equally strong prohibitionists and yet
differ as to the methods and times;
and it was not for him to impugn the
character of anyone because they
might not see eye to eye in reference
to methods and times. This was not
the government’s question, it was not
a question of the two parties as they
were found in the house. It was pre
eminently the people’s question.
There was the widest possible differ
ence between an enactment and the
permanent enforcement of an enact
ment, and it was this that ire desired
to treat of at the present juncture.
There were difficulties which practi
cally met them that moment they at
tempted to go to work at the enact
ment, of a prohibitory law in this
country. Mr. Jamison’s resolution did
not permit of any delay in the matter.
If it were carried the government
would have no option but to at once
and upon the spot enact a prohibitory
law. Did they want a prohibitory
law passed the very next day if this
resolution were passed, or did they
mean if the resolution were passed the
government seould have ihe opportu
nity of considering ways and means
for taking action ? He would allude
to some of the difficulties in the way.
In the first place, if this resolution
were carried and a prohibitory law
enacted, one of the very first things
to happen would be that they would
lose out of the revenues-of the Do
minion $7,500,000. The moral senti
ment of the temperance people would
say: “Let it go. Money is of no
worth when put in the balance against
moral worth and the spirit of the
country.” This was, nevertheless, a
practical difficulty, and the very mo-
HOMER, BANKS COUNTY, GEORGIA, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21,1891.
ment the bill passed he would have to
come down to the bouse and provide
for $7,500,000 of taxation. Where
would he g-o ? There was nothing iu
the tariff list upon which the amount
could be raised. There was no Avay
to make up the dificit except by put
ting a direct tax upon the people.
A voice: “Reduce the expenses.”
Another voice: “Let us have direct
taxation.”.
Mr*Foster, continuing, said if the
people of the country pronounced in
favor of prohibition and gave him the
money to make up the deficit, there
was not a Word to say against such a
decision. The people had the right
to enact a prohibitory law, but tho
carrying oift of the enactment was
the chief thing in a question of this
kind. The sentiment of the country
must he sufficiently strong, not only
to enact the law, but to keep it, when
all its consequences, financial and
otherwise, were felt. There were two
ways to get the sentiment of the peo
ple on this question, and one was the
constitutional way of submitting it to
the people at the polls, and let every
constituency send to parliament a
man pledged to Vole for tho prohibi
tory law. Another way was to take
what was known as a plebiscite,
which would be an expression of the
peoule on the question, although it
might not be an issue in the election
of the members of the house.—The
Voice.
“Our Sufficiency is from Goll."
The encouraging side of this truth
is that, just so soon as a man becomes
.sensible of his insufficiency, and really
desires a wisdom and strength ade
quate to the duties lie has to dis
charge, God will be to him the suffi
ciency he needs. He will come in
upon him in formg of light and cour
age and moral energy.
When Got] appeared to .Moses in
the flame of the burning bush at I lu
rch, and laid upon him the unprece
dented responsibility of leadership in
delivering the children of Israel from
their hard Egyptian bondage, this
large, providential man, who was to
loom into such majestic proportions
that i is name and fame would till all
the centuries, shrunk back and said:
“Who am 1?” It is tho same as
though he had asked : “What fitness
is there in me for this extraordinary
undertaking?” He was only a shep
herd, leading the flocks of his father
in-law, Jethro, back ami forth in the
wilderness of Midian, and it seemed
like mockery to summon him to this
great service. Urged still further, his
reply was substantially the same: “O
my Lord, 1 am not eloquent, neither
heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken
unto thy servant; but I ant slow of
speech, and of a slow tongue.” To
his own thought lie had no competen
cy to make pleas in behalf of justice
and freedom before Pharaoh, and to
persuade a downtrodden people, like
the Israelites, that he could secure
their emancipation. But this was the
immortal answer to Ins objection:
“Who hath made man's mouth? or
who maketh the and .mb, or tho deaf,
or the seeing, or the blind? have not
I, the Lord ? Now therefore go, and
I will be with thy month, and teach
thee what thou shalt say.” Here was
hesitancy; here was timidity; here
was even a painful sense of insuffi
ciency; but God said: “Look unto
me; I will take your insufficiency, and
in my divine wisdom and strength
make it sufficient.” lie did; and the
man so girded and directed went forth
to one of the most memorable
achievements of all the ages.
llow different would have been the
issue had Moses been a man full of
pride and self-conceit! When called
and appointed of God to this unique
service, supposing he had said, “O
yes, I can do it; I have sympathy
with my people iu their distresses; I
know human nature; I am instructed
in all the wisdom of the Egyptians;
and out in diis wilderness with the
flocks and under the stars and in the
midst of wild, roving bands both my
body and my mind have become
seasoned to patient endurance, and I
can do it,” what would have been the
result ? In the first place, he would
mot have been called to this position;
in the second place, even though he
had necii called, and this great and
sacre-’K’uty had been laid upon him,
he would not have turned to God for
the proper furnishing for his work’,
and ijgjpce would surely have failed;
for neither Moses nor any other man
could ever carry through to its final
eonsuonnation an undertaking so pro
digious as this without aid from the
wisdopa and strength of God.
Mi' not the,assertion be ventured
that one supreme demand of our
times js for men and women so emp
tied of self, so deeply and painfully
consesmce of their own insufficiency
far the duties laid upon them, that
God can enter into them and fill them
with the light aiid, energy of his
Spirit? This is an age of organiza
tion and machinery. If it occurs to
anybody to do any thing, instead of
'doing it, ho starts a society. We rely
oti btTo. and numbers and moral st and
ing. What is needed beyond every
thing else is to fall back into reliance
on God. It is the wheel in which we
trust rather than the spirit within the
wheel/ There will be strength in the
Church of Christ and courage and a
spirit u,i aggressiveness more nearly
correspondent with the length of our
mombjf'ship rolls, and the wealth
represented in our communicants,
when there is a deeper sense that all
real sufficiency must he found where
the great apostle found it, not in cur
selves, hut in God, “1 will strength
en thee" is the divine promise, and
the human testimony is: ‘I can do
all tilings through Christ which
strengiheneth me."—The Treasury.
The .British Scandal.
The Prince of Wales has never
posed as a model of tho proprieties
and moralities of life. Quite likely
he Wes nothing to be ashamed of in
h.is_.C" ' nectioii with the “baccarat,
trial.” But the English people see it
and the whole world sees it. The
facts in the case, as brought out in
the testimony cabled over to America
at the rate of 3,000 words a day, are
briefly as follows; Colonel William
Gordon Gumming, of the Scots guards,
formed ont* of a party last September
at Tan by Croft, the Prince of Wales
forming another. The game of bacca
rat was begun, and one evening the
discovery was made that Sir William
was cheating. We are not familiar
with tho game, but it appears that
there was a “banker,” which part was
taken by the prince; that each player
was supposed to lay his stakes beyond
a certain line on the table; if his
cards won, he was to be paid accord
ing to the amount of his stakes. By
the testimony of five witnesses, Sir
William frequently, when ho found he
had won, flipped an additional counter)
representing the stakes, across the
given line with a lead pencil, or
dropped it from his concealed palm.
The charge of cheating was made,
and when Sir William found that
there were five witnesses against him
lie signed a paper pledging himself
never again to play cards, the others
pledging themselves to secrecy. But
the secret leaked out, reached the
clubs, and finally reached the papers.
Sir William’s reputation was blasted;
for, while gambling seems to be a
proper thing in the fashionable circles
of England, to cheat when you gam
ble is an unforgivable sin. Sir Wil
liam thereupon brought suit for slan
der against the five witnesses to
his cheating. The trial closed
with a verdict against Sir William.
The presence of the Prince of Wales
was required for the first two days,
as a witness; but be has been, of his
own accord, a steady attendant every
day since. It transpires that it was
he who urged, against the wishes of
his host, the playing of baccarat; that
the counters were furnished by him,
being some which he is in the habit
of carrying around in his pocket to
the houses of friends whom he visits,
inasmuch as, apparently, he cannot
amuse himself in any other way. It
is to be presumed, also, that Sir Wil
liam’s offense (he is a young man, and j
not rich) was induced by the difficulty ■
he found in playing for such high
stakes as the prince and other of bis
associates insisted upon, and the ne
cessity of doing so in order to keep in
the prince's set. The prince’s steady
attendance at the trial was interpret
ed by Sir William’s counsel as arr
effort to prevent th 6 plain talk con
cerning his conduct that might other
wise be uttered. Nevertheless the
counsel, Sir Edward Clarke, solicitor
general, looked the prince in the eye
and declared that the military author
ities could not remove Sir W.lliam
from his regiment without also re
moving the prince himself. The case
has boen a most distasteful one to the
English, and may have important
effects in the near future in deciding
whether England shall continue to
keep an expensive figure-head to her
government, called Royalty, or dis
pense with it, 1 as well as the house of
lords, altogether.—The Voice.
The Alabama Mirror (Selma) says:
What England failed to accomplish
by force she has done by finance, and
this country was never more fully
subjected to the crown of Great.
Britain, than it is now under tho do
minion of British gold. One-half of
the great wealth creating industries
of this country are controlled by Fng
hsh capital, and fully four fifths of
the money loaned upon real estate
that is slowly and surely eating up
the land with its ever increasing in
terests has come from the same source.
Tlie financial legislation of this coun
try for the past thirty years has been
inspired by England. She lias gained
absolute power and control over the
finance of tho country and is now
rapidly acquiring, under existing laws,
the ownership of tho mines, furnaces,
quarries, railroads, elevators, ware
houses, cotton mills, oil mills, phos
phate beds and agricultural lands, to
say nothing of hanks and bonds and
stocksAif all kinds. *
Needless Sorrows.
Ah, what infinite sorrow men lay
up for themselves in resisting the
divine will! If you fret and chafe
against his appointments, finding
fault with him because he has not
given you another lot, some other
partner for your life, some more con
genial occupation, you cannot but bo
wretched; for at the bottom of all
such dispositions, which fume as the
waves of the sea, there lurks a feel
ing of disappointed pride, which
thinks that it deserved some better
treatment from God, and considers,
itself ilitised.
But who are we that demand so
fair and comfortable a lot—we whose
first father was a gardener who stole
his Master’s fruit, who have sprung
from the dust but yesterday, and who
have piled Alps on Andes of repeated
sin 1 Let us accept what God sends.
The worst is ten thousand times bet
ter than wo deserve. The hardest
is the better evidence of a love which
dares not spoil us. The whole is dic
tated and arranged by such wisdom
as cannot for a single instant err.
The shadow cast by that mighty hand
is dense and dark; its pressure is
almost overwhelming. David cried,
as lie felt it: “Day and night thy
hand was heavy upon me: my moist
ure is turned into the drouth of sum
mer.” But bend beneath it. Its
pressure may be felt in personal suf
fering, in rebuke or shame or per
secution or in loss of property or in
some other form of chastisement; yet
take each as another opportunity of
putting into practice this injunction
of humility: “Lie still, my soul; what
ever God ordains is l ight and good;
thou deservost nothing better; what
right hast thou to be sitting at the
royal table at all, when thou hast
forfeited it for the swine’s fare? If
thou hadst thy rights, thou wouldst
be now in the outer gloom.”—Meyer.
The Rounded Life.
It is well to remember that the
most beautiful and helpful lives are
those which are most fully rounded
and most completely developed on
every side. Look at the men and
women who come nearest to you in
SINGLE COPY THREE CENTS,
the way r of influence and sympathy.
Are they not almost invariably per
sons of full-orbed character, persons
no part of whose better nature is al
together repressed? I)o they not
appeal to you because they are so
large minded, so catholic in their
sympathies, so fundamental in their
conception of life ? The large, breezy,
hopeful outlook is theirs; and it is
theirs because they live on a higher
and broader plane than the men and
women who are tied down to prescrip
tive notions and special graces.
The time has come for young
Christians to appropriate the truth
that the gospel which they profess is
good for all of life. It is just as good
for a picnic as it is for a funeral; it is
just as good for a shop or school as it
is for a meeting house. It is good to
make rounded lives and characters.
There is nothing in it inimical to any
thing which is good, true, innocent,
and helpful. Narrowness in theology
makes bigots, and narrowness in prac
tical religion makes canters and life
less literalists. What the church
wants to-day is fresh young lives,
round ns the full circle of multiform
existence, and full to the circumfer
ence with the vital truth of the gos
pel. Religion is-hot simply for our
Sunday souls: it is for the whole
year man—Zion’s Herald.
The first trial for jury-bribing in
connection with the Hennessey case,
iu New Orleans, resulted, several days
ago, in a verdict of guilty. The de
fendant was one Bernard Glaudi, and
evidence was given of his .offering
one of the jurors SSOO to stand out
for acquit tal of the murderers of Chief
lleimessy. The defendant’s only de
fense seems to have been that his
offer was made as a joke, but the
unappreciative court could not see
the point of a joke of that sort, and
sentence was imposed. The lesult of
the trial tends, of course, to vitiate
whatever moral effect the acquittal
of Hennessy’s assassins may have had.
It grows increasingly certain that the
eleven men lynched in the parish
prison deserved death, and escaped
legal death only by adding bribery of
jurors to their crime of assassination*
But all this only deepen the disgrace
resting on New Orleans. If the
awakening of moral sentiment is
more than a spasmodic ono, the result
of tlie whole affair is cheap at tho
price paid.—The Voice.
“Tho best banking system tho
world ever saw” seems to be in a bad
way just at present. Tlie Comptroller
of the Currency don’t appear to con
trol, and the whole thing is a “go as
you please” affair after the people
have deposited their money. The
additional security to depositors
claimed for this system over the old
private hanks is all a delusion and a
snare, as shown by tho recent Phila
delphia failures.—Economist.
You are too busy to pray, to go to
church, to spend an hour witli your
family ! Then you are a great deal
busier than you ought to be. No
legitimate task can be so exacting as
to excuse you from the performance
of tho highest duties that God puts
upon you. The probabilities are that,
if you would only take time to think
about it, you would see that you are
frittering away in unessential labors a
great deal of time that ought to bo
given to better things.— Christian
Advocate.
I pray you with all earnestness to
prove and know, within your hearts,
hat all things lovely and righteous
are possible for those who believe in
their possibility, and who determine
that, for their part, they will make
every day’s work contribute to them.
—liuskin.
If a man looks for God, God knows
that he is looking. He that seeks is
sought. Take trouble to win a bles
sing harder for you to get than for
others, and you shall have betowed
upon you better than you sought for.
Lynch.
Subscribe for The Gazette.