The Prombition Question.

Feilding Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 52, 29 August 1896, Page 2

The Prombition Question.

MR BAGNALL IN* REPLY TO THE > REV. L. M. ISITT. 1 Although the weather was very un- t favorable, tbe Feilding Assembly Rooms ' were packed last evening to hear Mr J. J. Baguali's reply to the Rev. L. M. Isitt'B } lecture in support of Prohibition, dcliv- ( ' ered recently in Feilding. There were ' nearly 500 persons present, includ- j j iug a large number of ladies, and tbe i I audience was very enthusiastic throsgh- > | out the address, there being also fre- > quent interjections with tbe consequent f applause from the opposite side. This f was, undoubtedly, ono of tbe liveliest * meetings 'held in Feilding, but ifc was i not disorderly at any time. Tbe Mayor, ] Mr W. A. L. Bailey, presided and intro- 1 duced the speaker, whom, he said, would 1 reply to the Rev. Mr Isitt on one of the < questions of tho day. On rising to speak Mr Bagnall was re- < ceived witb .loud applause, and be pre- i fixed bis remarks by thanking the Mayor < for presiding, and the audience for tbeir | attendance. Their presence gave bim '. great pleasure because he felt they ap i proved of tho cause be bad at heart. Most of tbose present had been to bear : tbe Rev. Mr Isitt, at wbich meeting tbe Mayor was conspicuous by his absence. He (the Mayor; was the head of a body wbich derived a i*evenue of . £'327 a year from botel properties, an amount Prohibitionists desired to deprive tbem of. Although Mr Isitt had said that " the parson was the fool of tbe family," be was painfully diligent in making it evident that he (Mr Isitt) did not believe what he said. Mr Bagnall argued tbat bis mode was not in good taste. Those present were there as a protest against the manner in which Mr Isitt conducted himself. (Cheers.) Mr Cocker and bis friends were present to minimise tbe barm Mr Isitt had done fco their cause. He combatted Mr Isitt's statement that the liquor traffic was the dirtiest and most disreputable. (A voice, "So it is." Cheers.) Mr Bagnall then went on to say that Mr Isitt bad described him as an •■ apoplectic cur." Tbis statement he criticised, statiug he desired two things : the esteem of tbose who respected him and the abuse of those who did not. If Mr Isitt were justifiedin calling him a cur, then be bad a right to; if not, the person using the epithet was a cur. He described Mr Isitt's question as to what mother would like to see ber daughter a barmaid as venomous and malignant, and argued thac many young women earned an honest living in that way. He asked : Was it because a girl was poor that she was not pure ? He was told the majority of women sympathised with Prohibition, but this he declined to believe. He had never seen a girl in a bar misbehave herself yet, and he asked had Mr Isitt ? If so. how, wbere, and wben ? Did Mr Isilt's experience justify bis remarks? With reference to Mr Isitt's remark that Mr Joseph Chamberlain never had a principle to sell, Mr Bagnall urged that Mr Chamberlain was one of the greatest statesmen and orators of tbe day. [There were hero some interjections with a cross-fire of applause, j Continuing, Mr Bagnall eaid that interruptions proved that some people were afraid of the arguments brought against tbem. On economical matters Mr Chamberlain was one of the most powerful men in the Home country, and one who gave the whole of bis great powers for ths beuefit of tbe people. Mr Jos. Chamberlain was opposed to the principles of Prohibition, and bis logic was sufficient to kick Mr Isitt and Prohibition out of England. He (Mr Bagnall) did not know bo much about | Scripture as the Reverend Mr Isitt, but he did not find anything in tbe commandments in support of Probibiton, but did find tbat " thou shalt not bear false witness," and tbat was what the Prohibition champions were doing. The Piohibitionists said tbat liquor was responsible for crime, for filling tbe asylums and gaols. This, he said, was untrue and he quoted an authority in support of bis contention, saying that total abstainers contributed nothing towards asylums or gaols. It was impossible to abolish liquor altogether, but it could be controlled and in tbis way drunkenness would be greatly diminished. There were thousands of pounds invested in hotel property in New Zealand and Prohibitionists should prove why they should ruin any of the persons interested. Mr Isitt made any quantity of assertions but produced not one atom of proof. Referring to tbe statement tbat total abstainers contributed to tbe cost of gaols, asylums, and police, which he denied, he read statistics showing that the revenue derived from spirits i and beer by this colony was £'446,719, whilet after deducting tbe expenditure on police, asylums, and gaols, there was a balance of £'208,406. It was a fabrication to say that alcohol cost abstainers anything. He ridiculed Mr Isitt's statement with reference to a child he had heard of which underwent an operation (tracheotomy) and after the doctor had gone tbe parents took tbe tube out of the child's throat to procure liquor, and tbat | tbe child afterwards died. The parents, had this story been true, would have \ been guuilty of murder and would have been prosecuted. The story was told by Mr Isitt to prejudice the minds of the people, and was the result of a fertile imagination. Mr Bagnall did not deny that tbe liquor traffic was liable to excess — so was everything else. But there was not sufficient excess iv New Zealand to justify Prohibition. There were individual casos and tbese could be dealt with individually. He said statistics gave the consumption of liquor as £'2 17s in New Zealand and £3 18s in England, but the working classes at Home got , their beer for 4d a quart while tbey paid 6d a glass in New Zealand, so tbat the j latter figures were nothing to go by, and . if we take £12 in England to £'3 in New Zealand it would be nearer correct. , There might be an excess ef drinking in England. In New Zealand there were ; licensed victuallers, who were re- ( quired ky the law to provide victuals ( and afford good accommodation, wbile , in England a traveller obtained good 8 accommodation in country districts with j difficulty. He was deeply impressed by the superior country hotels in this colony t wbich was a great assistance towards increasing tbe touring traffic. Tourists were tbe means of inducing tbeir friends to come and reside here, but they would shun New Zealand if the hotels were shut. He went on to quote the remarks of W. A. Sell, Superintendent of tbe * Metropolitan Police of Topeka, with * reference to Prohibition in Maine, to the « effect that it was a failure there, and *« that by going to a chemist's shop, and ? swearing an affidavit you could get what n alcohol you wanted. While in Welling- P ton on one occasion be went to the Pon* * rua Asylum, and when there asked the n superintendent if he could giye a cause ® for the insanity in New Zealand. The « reply was that it was chiefly due to the y solitude of being by themselves inthe * bush. It was only recently he (Mr ▼ Bagnall) saw two. men going down to « that asylum wbo bad become insane in the bush. Tbby should come out occasionally and have a jovial time witb 1 tbeir friends. With reference to tbe * statement by Mr Isitt tbat alcohol was } a waste product, he said that the au- » thority mentioned— Lebeck— was* only partially quoted, and be went on to read ii tbe remarks of that authority to the C effect tbat alcohol was useful as a resto* h rative means of correction , a protection h against organic disturbances, and that £ tbe quantity of wine consumed on the c Rhine was the cause of freedom from ii disease there. He asked, "Wasn't it n fraud to keep back a portion of what au tl

.authority b< vs ?" Ue n'r > -van a long list of complaints per.-ons alleged they were suffering from whi.' getting alcohol from chemistr* in Maine, and argued bhat if it was a waste prod act it couldn't cure all tbose complaints. Again, if it was a waste product, why did the medical profession in England adopt it as remedy for influenza '? On one occasion a doctor advised him (Mr Bagnall) to driiak champagne aa a cure for an attack of influenza, and be drank it. Some time ago the Marquis of Salisbury said it was all very well to say the majority must rule, but you can't make the minority obey wben that minority conaiders tbat to do so is against its conscience. The laws would be broken and avaded. Mr Isitt said he saw no drinking in Maine, but any quantity of prosperity. Assuming there was drinking there, they would not invite Mr Isitt to partake of their revelry. Mr Bagnall juoted authorities showing that there were a large namber of paupers, and also condemning the increased drunkenness in Massachusetts in strong terms. The experience in the States was that the prohibitive law was a failure, and that smuggling and elicit manufacturing were rife. Why did not the " Gentle Shepherd " mention Clutha as an example of the success of prohibition ? Everyone knew the sale of liquor bad increased there, and he instanced the prosecutions for sly grog-selling in that district. There was a large brewery which supplied tbe Clutha district with more beer than ever before. The women who would stop tbe liquor, must provide something else in its place. Touching on the question of revenue, he asked bow were they going to raise it if they lost the duties on alcohol. They could'nc put it on the land, for that coald'ntbear it ; it couldn't be put on the customs revenues for they were as high as they could be in New Zealand, and the importations mnst then be reduced. Tbe consequence wonld be tbat wages would bave to be reduced. If the sale and consumption of alcohol were fraught with so much crime, why did the Saviour select wine to symbolise his own blood to wash away the sins of the world ? Mr Bagnall, in conclusion, said tbat be had not appeared before them from any motive other than to maintain truth, justice, and liberty. He would move ■• That tbis meeting pledges itself to oppose prohibition by all legitimate means, as it would detract from the liberty of tbe subject and the freedom of tbe people, and increase tbe evil it is intended to alleviate." Mr H. C. Wilson seconded tbe motion. and in doing so thought that moral suasion should be used to bring the intemperate back. He believes in temperance, but objected to tbe villianous method of Pro* hibuion. He stood np in the defence of liberty and defended licensed victuallers, amongst whom there were men as respect* able as any in the country, and as long as tbey conducted a bouse respectably they had a right to tbeir liberty. Questions having been invited, the Bey. J. Cocker proceeded to get on the Btage amidst cheers and applause. A slight difference having occurred between Mr Cocker and Mr Bagnall as to ths procedure, cheers and counter cheers were given by tbe audience. Mr Cocker, proceeding, asked why Mr Bagnall did not move the resolution he intended at Mr Isitt's address. Mr Bagnall replied that there was no obligation on bim to do so. After askingotber unimportant questions and receiving replies, Mr Cocker asked if Mr Bagnall believed in free and un* restricked liberty of the subject. Mr Bagnall : Yes, excepting what is wrong. In reply to Mr J. Greenwood, Mr Bagnall did not think Mr Jos. Chamberlain would be so foolish as to say that " if tbe desire for strong drink was removed that we should see our taxes removed by millions and oar gaols and workhouses empty." Mr Greenwood' asked if Mr Bagnall was aware tbat Mr Gladstone had said that "no treasurer need ever trouble himself about loss of drink, for the say* ing in expenditure would far outweigh it." Mr Bagnall replied that he was not aware of such a statement haviug been made by Mr Gladstone. Mr Cocker : How do the hotels of this town give a revenue of .£327 to the borough ? Ido not doubt it, but bow is it made up ? Mr Bagnall : Then, why do you ask if you are satisfied it's correct ? Mr Cocker asked if Mr Bagnall could say that tbe Mayor had wilfully stopped away from Mr Isitt's lecture. Mr Bagnall replied tbat he could not say that. The Mayor thereupon made an explanation, stating that he was out of town aud could not attend, and had written to Mr Cocker to that effect before the address. Mr Cocker said he bad asked the question as a viadication of the Mayor's character as some people might have had a wrong impression. Mr Cocker asked for a proof that 90 per cent of tbe people of New Zealand went to hotels. Mr Bagnall could not give proof, but said they could take it that 45 per cent went to hotels, and they were degraded according to Mr Isitt. A very large and respectable portion ot people went to hotels. Mr Cocker : Mr Bagnall admits he can't prove it, and he said he came bere to make no assertion he could not prove. Mr Bagnall : I only assumed and supposed, so tbat I did tell truth after all. The Rev. C- C. Harrison moved, as an amendment, " Tbat experience shows tbat the liquor traffic cannot be mended, and that, therefore, it should be ended ; tbat this meeting pledges itself to vote for the prohibition of tbe liquor traffic at tbe next general election." Mr W. H. Judkins seconded the amendment. After a desultory discussion the Mayor put tbe amendment, wbich he declared lost on a show of hands by an averwhelming majority. The motion was then put and declared carried, the inuouncement being received with proonged cheers. A vote of thanks to tbe chairman erminated the proceedings.