The following is the full text of the address on "Civilisation," delivered by Sir Robert Stout at the Municipal Theatre, Napier, on March 17, 1918:—

We are met to-night to consider what we mean by the term "civilisation." It is a word we are continually using and our dictionaries give us its meaning. It has many definitions. Edmund Burke said that the basis of civilisation was the "spirit of a gentleman and the spirit of religion." Before this saying could be appreciated we would have to define the terms "gentleman" and "religion." Another eminent man—Matthew Arnold—said that civilisation was the "humanisation of man in society." Leaving aside these definitions, in the meantime, we can approach the consideration of the term by remembering what man is. We have in nature many diverse living things. They are differently constituted and their lives differ. There is one class of living things that is called "uni-cellular"—that is, the life is represented by one cell only. This one cell serves for their brain, their stomach, and everything else that many-celled animals have. Many illustrations may be given of one-celled living things. There is one called "Pleurococcus vulgaris," one of the Algæ. You have, no doubt, seen green layers or green slime on the bark of trees or on stone walls. That may be the "Pleurococcus vulgaris." Its little cell can take in all the food and drink it requires, and it can get rid of page 4 certain substances. To quote the words of a recent essay by Professor McLeod, in the "Hibbert Journal," "it grows, it can secure itself against dangers, it can for example make its outer wall thicker when it is threatened with withering in dry weather; it can multiply itself." There are many other one-celled living things. Yeast is one, and the living thing which causes the phosphorescence in the sea is another, These one-celled beings never help each other. They are individauls, and each is for himself alone. You may find them together in crowds, but they are not in society, for the one docs not depend upon the other.

As we examine living things higher in the scale of life we find a union of cells, and the one cell helping the other. Society has begun. One illustration may be given. There is one of the Algae called "Ulothrix," which we find in ponds. It clings to some submerged object, a bit of stone, for example, one cell having the power of clinging to the object and remaining fixed to it during life. This holds the plant in position while the other cells secure food and drink, and the plant lives. The root cell aids it, and the root cell itself is aided by receiving food from the other cells. There is never any trouble between them; both live in unison. If the root cells were to "strike" it would die, and the living thing of which it is a part would also die.

Let me take another illustration of mutual aid in nature, showing how the life of some things may be helped by beings of other species. You will no doubt remember what Darwin says about the growth of red clover. The bumble bee, in its trips from flower to flower of the red clover, fertilises it, and Darwin says that without cats in England there would be no clover! How is this? The bee nests are raided by the field mice, and if the mice are numerous there will be few bees, but page 5 if the mice are killed off by cats the bees will be numerous and clover will flourish. Here is, then, an example of mutual aid in society from a source other than the species benefited.

"Man is a Social Animal."

Now man is a social animal. He has been so from the beginning of his existence, which some people put as far back as a million and a half years. He is not the only social animal in the world, but there is something about man that is not to be found in any other individual in animal society. He has a capacity for progress. A bee-hive is a society, and its life prevails according to what we may term laws or rules. The bees act in the same way to-day as they did hundreds of years ago. There has been, so far as we know, no change in their life. So with ants. Had we not an ancient Hebrew writer saying: "Go to the ant, thou sluggard, consider his ways, and be wise."

Man's social life has changed. His mode of government has changed, and there has been a change in his outlook, and in his beliefs, even in fifty years. The marvellous development of inventions, and the growth of knowledge amongst men, are almost beyond belief. From the Cave Man to the man of the Twentieth Century the progress has been continued and continuous. A man must, if he is to live, live in society. He cannot stand alone. If man is separated from his fellow-men he degenerates, and would, after a long term of years, cease to have the qualities of a human being. There are many animals, also, that would perish if they did not live in communities—bees, wasps, ants and others. Even the ordinary cattle in the fields and the sheep on our hills would deteriorate if they did not live in society. If you separate some of the lower animals from the herd, you will find that they page 6 will degenerate. Of course, in the case of domesticated animals, such as the cow and the sheep, they may be kept in contact with human beings only, but I am speaking of one animal being entirely dissassociated from other animals, and living alone.

Order and Progress.

If, then, man can exist as man only in society, we have to ascertain what kind of society is the best fitted for his development. There must be a society—we call it a state, and its preservation and defence, it has been properly said, must be every man's concern. We must have no shirkers when its existence is threatened. We speak of "civilisation" as the state of society where progress is possible. If we have a community in which there is no order, we say that that society is not civilised. There may be diverse civilisations, just as there are different races, but in every civilised society two things must be present. These are, first, "Order," and second, "Progress." Without these civilisation is impossible. What do we mean by "Order" and "Progress?" We mean by "Order" that the rights of the individual members of a society are recognised. They have rights; they have duties, they have freedom. If it should happen that members of a society differ or quarrel, then if the society is civilised these differences or quarrels must be settled by some tribunals which the society appoints. Peace must be imposed. There is no room for War in a civilised community. Order, it is said, is Heaven's first law. Without order there is no possibility of a society existing in any civilised form. If we look at the past we will find that just as society has advanced in civilisation there has necessarily been a restriction of the individual. It is not left to him to punish those who do him wrong. But though he is thus restrained, society in page 7 another way gives him freedom and liberty, for without order ho would be at the mercy of those stronger and less scrupulous than himself. We say—to take an illustration from today—that a certain nation is ruled by military autocracy. That implies that there is not equal freedom for all classes of the people that exist in that society. In the past we know that there was a so-called civilised society which permitted duels. That is, if people quarrelled they had a right to redress their grievances by combat. Indeed, at one time in England there was power to appeal from a Court to the order of battle, and that right was only abolished by law in the last century. But even when such combat was permitted it had to be conducted according to certain rules, and so even in duels there was, therefore, in a sense order. We recognise, however, now by order that no individual has a right to redress his own grievances. If the individual had such a right, then an association of individuals would have such a right, and civil war would inevitably eventuate. Civil war means that the most powerful can oppress and murder the weaker. It is true that an appeal to arms may have to be made where there is an autocracy, and where the people have no power of redressing a grievance, and where many are oppressed. That, it has been said, is the ultimate right of humanity—to defend itself against oppression, but that appeal to this ultimate law is made only where true democratic civilisation does not exist. Where civilisation exists there is order, and that necessarily implies that quarrels, disagreements, differences between members of a community must be settled by some tribunal recognised by the community. It may be well to notice that when the nations nowadays speak of a "permanent peace" the suggestion made by all those who ask for a permanent peace is that there should be some page 8 tribunal amongst the nations which will settle national disputes, and which will have the right to appeal to the force of all the parties to the international agreement, to compel the awards or decrees of the tribunal to be respected. There is no possibility of bringing about a permanent peace unless there is some power of enforcing it, first, by the decrees of tribunals, and second, by a police or military force at the back of those tribunals. What is this but applying to a series of nations the rule of a civilised nation?

In America and in England associations have been started to bring about this Enforcement of Peace, by the creation of international tribunals and the creation of an international force to see that the decrees of the tribunals are obeyed.

We thus will gather that, lying at the root of civilisation there is the need of order. Wherever in a community you find people resorting to force, punishing people without recourse to judicial tribunals by personal violence, or by destruction of personal property not their own, or preventing people having equal liberty to the rest of the community, then that society or that community which permits such actions has ceased to be civilised. To say that the world is thoroughly civilised will be to state that something had happened that has not yet been realised. Wo see in our own community instances, for example, of what are called strikes, and what are called riots. These are proof that the community as a whole is not thoroughly civilised. Strikes and riots, are, in a civilised community, outbursts of savagery, and if that community has, for example, a tribunal for the purpose of settling, say, a labour dispute, and if either employers or employees choose to flout the decisions of that tribunal, and to engage in lock-outs or strikes, and to prevent work being carried on, and to page 9 threaten or engage in personal violence, then civil order is not present. Civilisation is being destroyed and savegery reigns.

Reason and Truth.

Again, there must exist differences of opinion amongst the people of every intelligent community. No two people may be able to see every question of morals, or politics, or science, or religion from the same point of view. You can see this illustrated even if you notice two or three photographers on the top of an eminence taking photographs. You will find that their photographs may differ; they have taken a different point of view, and the camera gives a different result to each. If this takes place in such a mechanical operation as the taking of photographs, what is likely to occur when we are dealing with past history, when we are dealing with personal opinions, when the people are of different branches of the human family and trained in different ways, and when passion perhaps obscures the judgment? We cannot expect unity of thought or action. Have we not known people to exalt the faiths of their ancestors above reason and truth?

We have to remember that in a civilised community each is entitled to do what he likes provided that his doing so does not interfere with the like rights of others. That is true freedom. A man may express what opinion he pleases as long as the opinions are not inciting to disorder, or slandering or libelling other members of the community, and that such expression is not for the purpose of creating riots, or disturbances. There must also be Progress. To obtain Progress there must be the dissemination of knowledge. You cannot expect that people can be wise, or act reasonably, if they are ignorant. Wherever you have page 10 ignorance prevailing you are likely to have a low state of society, and disorder. Russia would not, in my opinion, have been plunged into her present unhappy position were it not that perhaps eighty per cent, of the adults of Russia are unable to read.

All civilised States have recognised the need of knowledge, and that is why we have State systems of education. Without knowledge progress is impossible. There have in the past been endowments made for schools, for colleges, for universities, and just as a State has advanced in civilisation so has there been greater attention paid to the education of the people, and that nation that has had education most disseminated amongst its people has been the nation that has made the greatest progress, and where the people have had the highest ideals of life.

What, for example, in the dim past, differentiated Greece from Persia, or from other nations that existed 2500 years ago? It was that in Greece there was a high degree of culture amongst many of the community. Greece had men like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, and many others, and these men were continually questioning each other and trying to find out what the duty of the citizen was to the State in which he dwelt, and the duty of the State to him. I do not know that if to-day one could have a better statement of the duty of a man to a State than Socrates is said by Plato to have uttered before his Judges at his famous trial. May I quote one or two sentences from "Plato's Apology" to show you his idea of the duty of a citizen?—" My life throughout (he said) I allowed myself no rest, "but neglected what most men prize, money-making, family interests, military commands, public speaking, and all offices of the State, as well as plots and factions, deeming myself, in truth, too good a man page 11 to be safe if I entered into such things. I did not go where I could be of use either to you or to myself, but wherever I thought I could do most good to each one of you in private, thither I went, and tried to persuade each one of you not to take thought for his interests before he had taken thought how he might improve himself to the utmost in virtue and in wisdom; nor for the interests of the State before taking thought for the State itself; and in all other concerns to proceed in the same way." And after his condemnation to death, he thus finally addressed his Judges:—

"Wherefore I bear no malice at all against my accusers or against those who have condemned me; but as it was not with this idea, but rather with the intent to do me injury, that they accused and voted against me, it is right that they should be blamed. This favour, nevertheless, I ask of them: When my sons are grown up, avenge your-selves, fellow-citizens, upon them by tormenting them just as I have tormented you, if they appear to care for riches, or for anything else above virtue; and if they pretend to be something when they are really nothing, then reproach them, as I have re-proached you, with not caring for what they ought, and with thinking themselves to be something when they are worth nothing at all. If you do this I shall have received justice at your hands—I as well as my sons. But now it is time for us to go away, I to die, you to live. Which of us is going to the better fate is unknown to all save God."

You will see, therefore, from what Socrates said, that about 2400 years ago there were men so civilised that they exalted virtue, and held it to be the duty of the good citizen to engage in the service of man. Alas! that in the ages page 12 that such virtues were often punished. And alas! that the progress of mankind in civilisation has been so slow.

The struggle must ever be for more knowledge. We are showing that we believe it to be our duty, by the efforts we are making to popularise education, to promote education, so that the people may have more knowledge. We believe that if the people have more knowledge they will be able to reason—they will be able to view every question as wise people. Without knowledge there will be little chance of reason ruling. A man does not become a reasoning animal without training, and perhaps a training of centuries has made reasoning an inherited habit. We ought to know all that has been done in the world before our era, so that we may be guided by human experience: and we ought to know all we can about the wonders of nature with which we are surrounded, and we ought to know of the conquests of man over his surroundings, so that we may fully recognise our place in the universe. A true civilisation is based on intelligence and morality, and not on mere material things. In our search for knowledge we must, ever aim at ascertaining the truth: nothing must ever come between us and the truth. Mankind must continually struggle to maintain truthfulness. There are so many things that are constantly preventing us from striving for the truth; such as present associations, present surroundings, past alliances, what our fathers did, etc. It has been truly said that the hand of the past often strangles the struggle for veracity. We cannot have a civilised people if truth is not exalted. Archbishop Whately said: "It makes all the difference in the world whether we put truth in the first, place or in the second place." Without the love of truth civilisation cannot advance.

Morals and Citizenship.

There is another characteristic of a civilised community: Righteousness and Justice must exist therein. What is meant by Righteousness and Justice? We must obey the moral law. Without such obedience we stand condemned. Everyone has his rights. We must sec that no individual and no association of individuals is oppressed. Differences of opinion amongst our people must not affect the rights of our citizens. The community must ever act according to the highest dictates of morality and of justice, and must recognise and applaud all who, "with whatever imperfections of doctrine, or even of conduct, contribute materially to the work of human improvement." If we find a nation or a people repudiating their contracts, breaking their word, acting dishonourably, what must we say about them? We must say that they are uncivilised.

Have I then exhausted all the characteristics of a civilised community? No, there are others. Love, Brotherhood, and Affection must be found amongst the people. People in a civilised community feel for the sorrows of others. If you had a community that had no hospitals, gave no aid to the poor and to the weak, that community would not have attained a high state of civilisation. It has been suggested that having hospitals may tend to the physical injury of the race, because it may keep alive those who will ever be weak physically, and in this way the race may suffer. This has been said by some philosophers, and they have said that in order to preserve the race, to uplift it and make it efficient, you have no right to give aid to the weak; you must allow them to die. There is something in humanity besides mere physical strength. Man is a composite animal; he has such a thing as what we term a soul, and if you have a community page 14 that looks merely after physical strength, and neglects what is termed the finer feelings of humanity, that community will cease to be civilised. It will lapse into savagery and barbarity. Perhaps what has happened during the past three years in Europe is an illustration and a lesson to us, that unless a nation, in addition to physical strength and intellectual training, has endowments of kindness and good feeling, has love and brotherhood, it has not attained to what may be termed a civilised state. The invaders of Belgium, of Northern France, of Servia, of Poland, have by their inhuman acts shocked all civilised people, and all such people proclaim their deeds to be the acts of savages.

And as a corollary to Love and Brotherhood, human life will be deemed sacred. Anything that makes human life cheap, that tends to lead us to believe that in our social life or under our Individualism the death of the young or of the aged is of little or no concern, so long as wealth, or comfort, or pleasure is obtained—destroys civilisation.

A community that does not look with horror on the destruction of human life is on the downward road, and it will end as the society that made human sacrifices to Moloch ended. Do we now rate human life higher than successful manufactures, or speed in travelling? I hope some of us do.

Last of all, in a civilised State the citizens will show by their actions that they are prepared for self-sacrifice, that they are willing to do what they can for order and for progress in the community that they are prepared to live, not for themselves alone, but for the community and for humanity. In fact, the true test of whether a nation is civilised or not is found in the conduct of its people. Given a nation where the people are orderly, are obedient to the laws they themselves have made, page 15 and are just, where the people are truthful, where they love each other, where human life is sacred, and where they are ready to make sacrifices for the benefit of the community, and for the benefit of humanity, that nation is civilised, by whatever name it is called. Self-sacrifice is one of the best proofs of civilisation that perhaps can be adduced.

Duties.

If this question is put to us: "What is Civilisation?" I think I may adopt as the short answer to it Matthew Arnold's definition, which I have already quoted, namely, "The humanisation of man in society." If we are agreed as to what civilisation means, let me follow an old Scotch custom that used to prevail amongst clergymen of Scotland in the olden days. When a sermon was given in Scotland, towards its end, there was always what was called "the Application." If we as a people realise what civilisation means, are we ready to apply its principles to our own life? Are we ready to fight for knowledge, to fight for truth, to fight for righteousness, to fight for justice, to fight for liberty, to fight for freedom, to struggle for the spread of Love and Botherhood, and to show by our lives that we are prepared for self-sacrifice?

May I appeal to the young amongst us? The Pioneers of New Zealand are passing away. This came home to me when I looked over the list of the Members of Parliament of 1875; that is only 43 years ago. There were then 44 members in the Legislative Council and 80 members in the House of Representatives—124 members in all. How many, think you, of that list of 124 are alive to-day? There are only Four. They are: The Hon. Captain Baillie, Mr. Donald Reid, Mr. Thomas Kelly and myself. Alas! the scythe of the ever-present conqueror has laid many low. It is you page 16 young people who have to stop forward, to maintain order, and promote Progress—to keep the banner of Loyalty, and Justice, ever flying over your community. The Pioneers have done much. I cannot go as far back as many, but I can speak from personal knowledge of 54 years of life in the Dominion. What an advance there has been! Our Government has been democratised, Education has been promoted, and the amenities of civilised life wonderfully increased. When I first remember New Zealand it had few and poor roads, hardly any bridges. There was not a single large bridge in New Zealand. It had no railways, no telegraphs, no gasworks, no trams, no electric lighting, little drainage, no city with waterworks or drainage systems, no public libraries, no museums, no university colleges, few newspapers, cultivation was meagre, cities were small and buildings poor. And now we have all the luxuries of life as if New Zealand were an old community. We have also tried to solve some social problems, and in our material prosperity we have exhibited kindliness and consideration. We are a generous people, and in the nation's work our Pioneers have shown a loyalty, a devotion and a courage that might inspire a thousand epics. Who can adequately appreciate the self-sacrifice and heroism of so many of New Zealand's brave daugnters and sons? Do we not feel our souls stirred within us when we think how cheerfully they have laid down their lives to preserve us and to save humanity from savagery? All honour to the brave who have died for us! And to those also who, loyal to the Empire, loyal to New Zealand, loyal to humanity, are still fighting for truth, for righteousness, for honour and for justice! Will their conduct not inspire us to step forward to help civilisation onward? Did I hear the question coming from our youths, "What can we do?" I speak first page 17 to the young men. I gave you what Edmund Burke said was the basis of civilisation—"the spirit of a gentleman, and the spirit of religion." Let us consider how these two phrases may be defined. A man may be a gentleman who is poor in worldly goods, who may have neither land nor money; he will, however, so act that his actions will ever be a rule to humanity. He will consider the feelings of others, he will be kindly, he will be honourable, he will fulfil his engagements, he will be honest, truthful and loyal. He will be prepared to sacrifice himself to help his country and to help humanity.

The Power of Education.

And what is meant by the Spirit of Religion? It is not the mere repetition of a creed; it is leading the moral and the civilised life, and so acting that if all others were to do likewise, vice, crime and misery would be unknown in our land. John Morley once said: "Religion has many dialects, many diverse complexions, but it has one true Voice, the Voice of human Pity, of Mercy, of patient Justice." Will you help forward civilisation in our midst? We have many enemies in our midst. We have habits and customs that are not favourable to civilisation. Do I need to specify them? Are you young men, and I may put in my question, young women, educating yourselves? Are you reading the best books? I do not think our young people are such readers as some of my companions were in my youth. Let me give an illustration. During the holidays I was for two days away in the south-eastern corner of New Zealand, at Wai-kawa, a little township with an Accommodation House in a no-license district. I happened to take up a book that, lay on the table. It was an early volume of the Cornhill Magazine—the Fifth, I think. I opened it; it contained an page 18 article on a famous murder trial, the trial of Jessie McLachlan, in Glasgow. This trial led to a great deal of controversy. Was she or was an old man named Fleming the murderer? It recalled to me an incident that occurred one winter night in my native place. About ten young lads, none of us over 20 years of age, were together on a cold winter night, with snow falling, standing in the shelter of a stone dyke discussing the murder trial and that article in the Cornhill Magazine, which we all had read. We were workers; some were coopers' apprentices, some carpenters' apprentices, one or two clerks, and others. And what Lord Deas did and said we were discussing. Do you young men in New Zealand who are engaged in like employments read the better class of magazines and try to appreciate and understand what you read? I cannot answer the question. I hope I may be able to say "Yes." Is there a love of literature amongst our young men and women? No doubt the students in our colleges will hand the torch of learning on amongst you, but every one of you should spend some time every day in reading what the best men have said in the best books.

May I put this to you? Suppose there were in New Zealand one of the great thinkers of the world—Thomas Carlyle, or Matthew Arnold, or Edmund Burke, some great literary man, would you not feel honoured by meeting him and listening to his conversation? Well, by reading his works you get into touch with him. He is telling you his inmost thoughts; he is laying bare his soul to you. He is communing with you. Why will you not commune with him and listen to what he has to say of world problems? of the things in the world in which we dwell? You have that opportunity in books. You young people have vastly more opportunities than we who are past the so page 19 called limit of life—three score and ten years—had in our young days. Quite recently there has been started what is called Workers' Educational Associations. Why do you not form what is called Reading Circles? Suppose thirty young men employed in work in your city and suburbs formed a circle, met twice a week, got a tutor to meet them to help them to understand some branch of learning—Economics or History, or some author—Tennyson, or Browning, or Milton. The tutor would give a lecture and prescribe books. Once a week they would meet to hear the lecturer discuss the subject. It would be a students' class with a Debating Society. You would derive more real enjoyment from such an undertaking, you young men and young women, than from any other thing we could recommend to you. And you would be fitting yourselves for your position in the community and for your duty as citizens willing to do some service to your country. John Knox laid down in his day this proposition—that every man who had a son who was capable, if he could afford it, should be compelled to send his son to a university, in order that he might be able to effectively serve his country. John Knox's educational ideas have made Scotland and Scotchmen what they are to-day.

Everyone should have some employment, and everyone should feel it his duty to do some service for the community and for humanity. And when you work, "do your work as well as you can, and be kind." That is a motto for all of us. People who go slow at their work who idle when they should be working, are not civilised. They are not honest, and are not fulfilling their engagements. The foundation rules of civilisation are broken, and he or she is an enemy to the people. There is one enemy that our young men have to fight and conquer; it is this slavish cigarette habit that pervades all our towns. It is destructive to industrious habits; it is injurious to health; many young men have what is called a cigarette heart. During the Boer War, in some cities in England 30 per cent, of the recruits had to be turned down on account of this cigarette heart. So it was in the United States of America in the Cuban War. An eminent doctor who was on one of our hospital ships said that grave injury has been done to many sick and wounded soldiers by cigarette smoking. In many instances it has prevented their speedy recovery. You can tell a slave to the cigarette habit, not only by his brown fingers, and the smell of tobacco that lurks in his clothes, but by his pale face and his nervousness. I am told some young people smoke as many as two boxes, each of ten or a dozen cigarettes, a day. The cheapest are, I believe, about 6d. a box; some cost 1/-. Suppose the cost is only 1/- per day, 7/- per week, that is £18 4s. a year. What a waste! Just consider what that amount of money could do? If you invested that money in a Savings Bank, or in an Insurance Policy, page 21 payable 20 years after investment, what a different position you would be in than if you had spent your money on cigarettes. You would be stronger physically, you could educate yourself better, you would have more enjoyment in life. The cigarette habit will be a curse to you. Will you help forward your country by abandoning this vicious habit ?

Then we have amongst us the alcoholic habit—a curse to our race. It does just as much harm as cigarette smoking. Think you that the great Republic of the United States of America would have prohibited the manufacture of spirits if the use of spirits were not rendering its people inefficient? That is a lesson and an example for us. Is it any wonder that the United Kingdom has not won the war when it spent in 1916 about £230,000,000 in intoxicating liquors and lessened the efficiency of hundreds of thousands of its people? On the two drugs, alcohol and tobacco, the people of the United Kingdom spent in 1916 £252,619,000: that is, £203,989,000 on alcohol and £48,630,000 on tobacco, and the expenditure in 1917 on alcohol alone mounted up to £259,000,000. And if we consider that this was not merely a waste of money, at a time when every penny was required to maintain our Empire, but that the effects of these drugs was to cause inefficiency in every department of our Administration ana industries, may we not exclaim, in the words of a character in an old play, "What fools these mortals be!" Have you heard of the memorial presented to the Government by 2448 of the most distinguished citizens of Britain asking for the prohibition of the drink trade during the war? It was signed by Principals of Colleges, Mayors of Cities, Generals, Ambassadors, Fellows of the Royal Society, Judges, Magistrates, Artists, Poets, Scientists, Doctors, and page 22 hundreds of others. I cannot quote it all to you, but I quote two passages. First, it says of the Drink Trade:

"It hinders the army; it is the cause of grave delay with munitions; it keeps thousands of men from war work every day, and makes good sober workmen second-rate. It hampers the Navy; it delays transports, places them at the mercy of submarines, slows repairs, and congests docks. It threatens our mercantile marine; it has absorbed during the war over two hundred million cubic feet of space, and it retards the building of ships to replace our losses.

It destroys our food supplies. During the war it has consumed over 3,500,000 tons of food, with sugar enough to last the nation 100 days. It uses up more sugar than the army.

It diverts the Nation's strength; it uses 500,000 workers, 1,000,000 acres of land and 1,500,000 tons of coal per year; and during the war it has involved the lifting and handling on road and rail of a weight equal to 50,000,000 tons."

The fact is that in the United Kingdom 8246 tons of barley are being wasted every week on brewing beer, and 2,240,000 lbs. of sugar are being wasted every week on the same purpose. And alcohol is not food. I ask you to read the Royal Society's Report to the Board of Trade on "The Food Supply of the United Kingdom." Professors Waller, Noel Paton and W. H. Thompson say:

"Unlike foodstuffs more strictly defined, alcohol exerts effects as a drug which cannot be ignored in appraising its value as a food. These effects become more important when the individual is called upon to do strenuous work or to endure exposure . . . . . . . page 23 We may point, for instance, to the results exhibited by troops on the march. Repeated experience has shown that regiments not supplied with alcohol marched farther, and were in better condition at the end of the day, than others to which it had been given. Experiences in mountain-climbing have given similar indications, the total work done being smaller under alcohol and the expenditure of energy greater. In particular the records of American industrial experience are significant in showing a better output when no alcohol is taken by the workmen."

But we cannot cast stones at our kin beyond the seas. We in New Zealand spent in 1916 about £5,000,000 in alcohol and tobacco, and we talk about the rise in the cost of living! Why should that £5,000,000 not have been saved? I appeal to you not only for your own health's sake: I appeal to you to help forward our civilisation. Grant it, if you will, that you can take alcohol and tobacco and sustain no damage. Many cannot do so. Will you not then, for their sakes, show some self-sacrifice? It is the highest action that a man or woman can perform, to sacrifice something for humanity. You are, I know, loyal; you will be loyal to our laws as civilised people; you will not seek private vengeance, nor do what is properly called take the law into your own hands. Will you be still more loyal to our nation by so living that your example may encourage others to live the true, the ideal life, the life that will bring no sorrow to yourselves, nor to anyone? If you do, gambling, another curse in our midst, will cease, cigarette smoking will cease, and alcoholic drinking will cease.

"Act well your part,
There all the honour lies."