Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.