" LIBERTY."
[To ens Emma or me "Sereteroa."1
San,—In your review of this book you ask me a question which, in courtesy, I am bound to answer. You ask me why, if I was not thinking of the Spectator in the opening paragraph of my Intro- duction, I used words aide enough to include you. Jmt before you suggest that my criticism of the personal association between Prohibitionism and the advocacy of military unpreparedness contained an implied accusation against the Spectator. Nothing was further from my thoughts. When I wrote my Introduction 1 was thinking only of the curious fact that the names appearing on the Prohibitionists' Manifesto were in a conspicuous measure the names of men who shortly before the war bad endeavoured to reduce our Navy—an effort which, happily, had no success. There was therefore not the smallest slur intended upon the magnificent work which you have done in the interests of military preparedness. I believe (and it requires no heroic act of faith) that you have been splendidly right in your work for National Defence, but at the RUMS time I believe you are wretchedly wrong Out your advocacy of Prohibition and State Purchase. I knew, of course, when I wrote my Introduction that you were a supporter of the Strength of Britain Movement, but I stoutly demur to the accusation that any words were in any ordinary reading of them "wide enough to include "you in my references to the Little Englander Prohibitionists. I particularly used the words "some of them" in referring to the signatories of the Prohibition Manifesto.
As to your other question why I, as editor, permitted one of my writers to " single out the Spectator and attack it by name," my reply must be, first, that when one is editing distinguished writers who are writing over their own signatures one is very loth to interfere with their particular methods of expression; and, secondly, the reference to the Spectator of which you complain is, as you also point out, unique; and does it not say bomething for the self-restraint of those opposed to Prohibition that throughout this brochure there is only one reference to the Spectator, although the Spectator hes taken such a leading part in the advocacy of Prohibition? Your powerful advocacy did more to commend Prohibition to the public than any other effort on its behalf, and yet only one of the seven writers of the criticism
of the movement was betrayed, in one sentence, into an unfriendly
Previous page
