ADDRESS BY MR LYSNAR.

Gisborne Times, Volume VIII, Issue 546, 16 October 1902, Page 2

ADDRESS BY MR LYSNAR.

ANTI-PR OniJITIQN

The Theatre Roy -1 was crowded to the doors last night when Mr”. Douglas Lysnar gat e an-address m upposit ion to Prohibit ion. lie. Worship the M tyur presided, and in ihe course of a few introductory re-n.-rks, lie asked that. Mr Lysnar be given au at tent.ie hearing, as fie Was, sure all desired to Item' both sides of ifie question. (Appl,iu*c.> At tho close of liis address Mr Lysnar would be pleased to reply to questions.

Mr Lysnar, on rising to speak, was greeted with warm applause by both sections of the audience. He said that” when lie had addressed them on this subject three years ago. I e iiad from ttie bottom of his heart trusted that it would not again be necessary for him to again address them on the question., He had hoped that in the intervening period people would have given such attention to the subject that it would not again have been necessary for him to have come forward to oppose this so-called reform of no-license. But ever since the last poll the extreme Prohibitionists and certain churches, with their clergy, had been Rung their utmost to force on this “ reform.” as it was called. 'To his mind it was ttie most dangerous, and yet the most important subject that the electors m tliis colony have ever been called on to decide by their votes. He hart a dilli?ult task to perform that night. (Hear hear.) The subject was a huge one, and his difficulty was to so marshal the points—(hear, hear)—that they, would pause before voting for Prohibition, and would duly consider lieioie casting their votes on this matter. He would go so far as to ask each one to so exercise his or her vote as if tho result depended upon the way in which that single vote was cast. (Heat, hear.) lie went on to cltiss the parties as four—publicans, extreme Prohibitionists, extreme Prohibition followers, and the general mass who were desirous of ascertaining and adopting that course which they believed to lie right, and proper. lie did not propose to deal with the first two classes, but to address himself to tho Prohibit ton followers, and tiiose who were desirous of some practical reform. 'I hem were,, they knew, evils in t he liquor traffic as at present constituted, but for many of tiiose evils he blamed the Prohibition party. Prohibition was not the remedy for tiiose evils—it was an ungodly “ deform,” and would result in worse evils than the drunkenness. 'The extreme Prohibitionists were not fair, nor were they truthful, in tfieir statements. In this question they should cast aside sentiment, and look to the practical results. As far as sentiment was concerned there was nothing to lie gainsaid. There was, ‘no doubt, a good deal of evil resulted from tlie liquor traffic as at present conducted, but would Prohibition give the remedy ? (Voices : Yes and No.) No, it would not. They had got to study human nature in Bits matter ; and while lie spoke strongly against tlie extreme Prohibitionists lie desired to say that lie believed that most of the Prohibition followers were wellmeaning in the matter, and desirous of doing right. (Applause.) But they,were being misled by tlie extremists on the Prohibition side, and not knowing where Prohibition was going to lead them to. (Voice: Tell them.) Before going further lie wished to deal with the personal attacks the Prohibitionists made against anyone who choso to come forward and speak against them. They persisted in staling that he was there for tlie publicans- and bcng paid by them, (Voice: So you are.) He emphatically denied that lie was being paid by the publicans or —(Voice: The brewers ?)— No ;he was not being paid by the publicans, or the brewers, or anybody else. (Applause.) Whatever lie had done at tliis election or at tlie last one had been done with his own money. (Voice: Why do you do it?) He would tell them that presently. Tic repeated emphatically, no one had either given ol promised him a threepenny bit for what he had done. (Voice : Y ; ou will get it all the same.) 11c had silent £9B on tlie last election and up to that moment lie Hart not had a threepenny bit given to him. for his efforts, and if he could prevent the injury that would tie done to the district by the carrying of Prohibition lie would spend another £97. What had moved him to action in this matter more than anything else was tho action of tlie Churches, particularly his own Church and a minister and Bishop connected therewith. Tlie speaker then narrated the circumstances of the debate at the Synod meeting at Napier. He had opposed the motion to support the no-license movement, and did so on the ground that leaders of the movement had said that it was a, failure. Tie had mentioned the nama of Mr Isitt. (Mr Kothwell: Will you meet him in Gisborne ?) Tie advised that gentleman to go on with his notetaking and not interrupt. (Laughter.) Continuing, the speaker said tiiat from three-parts of the Synod came the assertion that what he had said was a lie, the number including the clergyman of his own Church. Another of the clergymen hissed across the room that/ he would bring Isitt face to face with him (Mr Lysnar) in threo days. He replied that they could bring Mr Isitt within three iiours if they liked, and he w-ould say that he had heard him make the statement at a public mectiDg. Subsequently he wrote to the press, and Mr Isitt replied, acknowledging that what he (Mr Lysnar) said was correct. During tho debate in the Synod Canon Fox said to him, “ You are quite right about Mr'T Isitt, I heard him make such a statement in Ormond, and believe that he would do it anywhere else.” He asked Cmion Fox if be would make the ex? planation to the Synod. Canon Foxreplied that he would, whereupon Canon Webb interposed, asking him. not to do' so, as it would, injure the cause. He (Mr Lysnar) wanted to know how the cause could he injured by the telling of the tr.uth. Canon Fox said it would not be injured, but Canon Webb continued trying to persuade Canon Fox, and thougli tlie meeting lasted until nine o’clock no statement as promised was made. Afterwards Canon Fox met him and apologised. He had not referred to this at Jast election he was only doing it now to show it was not tlie publicans paying him but the lie hurled at him in the Synod had caused him to think it was time to bo up ajid doing, when the clergyman of his own Church had said not to let the truth Ix2 known. He had written

to Canon Fox, detailing the circumstances, and asking him to reply, and •state whether it was correct or

n not. He had replied that it was. Iu response to calls the letter was readj 5 being an follows ir Waerenga-a-hika, 10th June, 1901. ;s Dear Mr Lysnar, — i] You ask me to write and let you know whether your account of what happened in the Synod at Napier while tho “ Prohibition question was under discussion ie ® correct. 1 You refer, I understand, to the session 0 when you resigned your position as member 3 of the Synod. i My recollections of what happened do not contradict yours, I think, in any particular; but there are points not in my own memory, such as the remarks attributed to Canon Webb. I think I am fconnd. in justice to you, to state to you what I do remember, and my memory is distinct as to the following points:— i 1. I did state to you that I believed you were right in the remark you made about (Mr Frank) Isitt’s admission, because I had heard him Eay at Ormond, “ We admit that Prohibition is a partial failure in Clutha.” I added that I respected him for that statement, that I thought he did his cause good by making it, that it seemed to me the remark of a fair-minded man, and that I listened to him with increased attention and readiness to j give due weight to his arguments. He went on, I believe, to explain more fully what he meant by his words. With that I have noth ing to do as regards you, but to the very best of my belief I heard him use those words and honored him for doing so. 2. I undertook, in fairness to you, to make this statement to the Synod, and fully fu, tended to do so. If any arguments were used to deter me, they did not affect me; but t-hiq I do not remember. 3. I failed nevertheless to fulfil my pledge, owing somehow to my missing the opportunity, not to any other reason. I daresay your account of how I came to miss it ia correct, but I know that I saw the opportunity pr.ea with regret and sham*, and that 1 had

ailed in justi'.oo to you and in keeping my promise. 4. I aceor dingly apologised to you, when I met you at terwarda in Gladstone Hoad, for having her ; n Bilant. X thin'a this is all that my memory enables me to ,-jtate with confidence, and probably it ‘all. you ask of mo. Details easily escape mo, and I cannot now remember anything n.oro, or I would state it, however disagreeable it might- bo.—Hinceroly Yours, J. Er.LioT For. Mr Stafford : It exonerates Canon Webb. Mr Lyrnar . The main point is that it substantiates what I said. Continuing, Mr Lysnar said that the debate bad come to a sudden close by motion to proceed with the vote 'bout further debate, and lie had exCanon Fox on that account, but elf had remained under that •Inch had never been cleared ice : It is cleared up now—.—Laughter.) The other in- . would he more familiar to them ..at was with reference to Bishop Julius, who had disavowed the statement lie (Mr Lysnar) had published;' but in a letter afterwards .received bad acknowledged, though he was going to vote for Prohibition, that it would beget worse evils than drunkenness. (A voice : What sort of bloke is he '!) —(Laughter.) “ Unfortunately he is the Bishop of my own Church,” replied Mr Lysnar. “ Then fire him out,” was the emphatic retort, which i caused much laughter. Continuing lie ] said that they went to church to hear i the Gospel preached, and he contended ■ that this was a social question which ] should not he interfered in by the i churches or ministers. If this went t on where would be tbc stopping stone? (A voice : Makaraka— laughter ; aim- ( tber voice : Prohibition.) JJe would not need to come there if if were not t for tlie way tiiis so-called “ reform ” j was poured into the ears of the people 3 on Sunday, Monday, and right through j the week. (Voice: They want a good collection Laughter.) The speaker y then went on to deal with the refer- ‘ cnees to Father Matthew and other y temperance reformers, and quoted ar- 8 tides to show that while Father Mat,thew, Cardinal Manning, and other Cl noted Catholics favored temperance, a a strong denunciation had been made by them of Prohibition. Coining nearer fhome, lie was astonished to hear the ° Rev, Mr Paterson tell of a boy who « said that lie was not going to catch k any more birds in his trap, liecau.se in “ the first place he had prayed that lie bi should not do so and in the second he * had broken his trap, and that the Pro- tr hihition party were going to break the ci traps. That sort of reasoning might do for hoys, but they knew that by Prohibition they would tic creating a Id: lot of sly-grog traps—they would have w ■twelve traps instead of one. He had P formulated some proposed reforms and at had submitted them to members of of Parliament, who had replied that the hi people could at any time call on them jj to make reforms. The monopoly that w was complained of was created by the gif’imbibition party, who by their action prevented the making of necessary re'forms. Mr Lysnar then enumerated the suggested reforms as follows, com- ]u mcnling upon the desirability of each one:— sc

1. That the monopoly in the trade which lb- created by tho present law should bo broken up, link cither tho question of granting new licenses should be left tu the ‘ ommittee or the Magistrate and Police, or that there should hii no new licenses granted in any particular locality if a certain percentage of the bona fide residents in that locality object, exception perhaps borng made on routes of travel where there is little or no settlement. 2. To disallow the employment of females in bars except whero they are interested io the business or are immediuto relatives of the licensee. 3 To appoint in tho chief centres analytical chemists as inspectors, who shall travel through the country and make surprise visits, and shall have power to seize liquors and have them tested at the expense of the Crown. Upon a licensee being convicted of "> having adulterated spirits upon his premises ho shall be subjected to heavy penalties. 4. To prohibit any person under the age of twenty-one years from going into or loitering about a billiard room or bor room of any hotel unloss such person is there for some special business purpose. 5. To prohibit any person being served with liquor who is under the age of 31 yearß, instead of 1G years as at present. G. To pronibit and fine any person resident in the place found on the premises after clobinghours, whether be haH liquor or not, unless he can satisfy the Magistrate that ho was there for some necessary purpose, such as medical attendant, etc. 7. To fino a licensee harboring suoh a resident during closing hours, and, if necessary, endorse his license. 8. Upon conviction, to give the Magistrate power to eloee the hotel for one or more days aocoording to the gravity of the offence, instead of endorsing the license as at present. 9. To prohibit liquor being served in any part of tho lioensed premises except in the bar and rooms immediately adjoining it, unless in connection with meals. In the course of liis remarks in favor-of the reforms he suggested, Mr Lysnar said that directly licenses were taken away there could not be proper

supervision. A policeman could now demand admittance to a public-house at any time, but when it came to a suspicion of sly-grog selling a policeman dare not enter a private house except by warrant. He spoke in high terms of the manner in which the pul>-lic-houses in Gisborne were conducted, the remarks being warmly applauded. He stated that drinking in the colony was decreasing—it had gone downtrom 3.63 in 1880 to a.,16 in 1890—and by such reforms as lie suggested far more good could tie effected than anything that would lie done by advocating Prohibition. It was all very well for the prohibition advocates to urge them to vote for Prohibition, but what stake had any of them in the district ? They had simply to pick up their carpet bag and leave at any time, but others had to stay whether they liked it or not and sec 'it out. .(Voice : You did not stay to see the water supply out.Laughter.) Yes, he had, but they had not got their Waihirere water supply vet any more thau they had got 1 rohibitiou. He hoped that their vote m this matter would lie more intelligent than it was in the Waihirere water supply .scheme. The Prohibition lecturers had a good time trave ling all over the world. (Voice . Not at youi exnensc ) No, hut one who had come here as a lecturer afterwards came to him in the capacity of a mining agent wanting to sell shares. (Laughter.) The speaker then explained the c.rcum-st-uicas of the voting in Balclutha after the change in the electorate, and he t noted from Bie Prohibitmms to show the amount of sly-grog selling in the Kina Country and wherever there was no license. Dealing with America ho made ( notations to show that the prohibition states had greatly decreased, and while admitting that the report he minted from dated back to 1 bOJ, he said that the facts he quoted were to a late datCjj Mr Lysnar thou wont on to show how drink was obtained in prohibited districts, and maintained that the evils awng from Blv-KtOK soiling woro greater than those that existed under the present system. Ho admitted that there was ample room or reform in tho trade, but that voting for Prohibition was not tho way to obtain this Tho speaker referred to the difficulty ' that there was in prohibited districtsi in netting people to give evidence against Sv-pro" sollors, men being afraid for fear of their neighbors to give evidence. Bo contended that in Clutha I rohibition had had a bad effect on the place, and that tho people would willingly vote it back if they could. Ho quoted opinions from his Clutha pamphlet in support of his eontontions, and created great amusomont by giving tho code words that tho young men of tho district usod when they wanted drink. The only good that Prohibition had done was to stop visablo drunkenness, but other evils had arisen which were ten times more lmquitious. The ooinion of a doctor who was practising in'the Clutha district was read, mowing that ho was entirely against prohibition. Dr Trotter, of Tapanui, was also quoted as an authority on the same question. Mr Lysnar went on to show that when many men wero in a prohibited district they got on the loose, and often lost their money and clothes before thoy got clear of tho sly-grog Hops. Passing on, the opoaker read extracts from letters from the Bov. Canon Dods against prohibition, and strongly supporting State control as th» true remedy to do away with the proqYile of the drink traffic, The carry-

ing of prohibition did not in any way stop drinking in any particular district, as it did not interfero with tho clubs or browcries. These remained open, and all classes could bavo whatever drink they required. Ho contended that the valuation of Bah clutha hud decreased between the years 1895 and 1903, the period during which it had been under Prohibition. In 1895, it stood at £5522, whilst in 1899 it had fallen to £5282. Mr Lyanar continued bia address amid frequent interruptions; but in all cases ho proved himself particularly smart at repartee, and his witty replies provoked a good deal of merriment. "Tlioyaro never tired of telling you that Buiclutha has gone ahead, and that many buildings have boen put up,” remarked Mr Lysnar ; 11 but from the time no license was carried until to day there has been no increase in the number of buildings in Balclutha. In 1895, there were 335 dwellings there, and that is the number that was there in 1901.” “ That is a downright lie,” remarked a lady in tho front soat. ‘‘A lady hero says that it is a lie,”

replied Mr Lysnar, “but I have hero a return and it can bo proved. The returns I am quoting from are not bald statements inado by rev. gentlemen, but returns made by individual people and Borough Council returns.’’

“If you carry prohibition in this dietrie!,” continued Mr Lysnar, "you will take 20 to 50 per cont. off the value of your properties. There are enough of us struggling along at present and making very little, hut I vonturo to say that if

prohibition is carried, within two years' timo half of tho business places in the town will bo closed up.” “Wiiutrot!” exclaimed a well-known builder.

“ My friond in tho front says 1 what rot,” replied Mr Lysnar, “ but I can assure him that it is not so. Ho must tako tho statements of these thirty businoss men of Balclutha for something.”

Continuing, Mr Lysnar went on to show how Gisborne had prospered in recent years, whilst Balclutha had shown no such progress. “ But surely you do not attribute that to tho liquor,” remarked a person in tho audience.

Tho remark passed uuhooded, and Mr Lysnar went on to speak of tho difference botwoen tho rateable and capital valuations, and also between Government and local valuations of property. Ho showed that tho capital value of tho town of Gisborne had increased in six years from .£300,000 to £500,000, whilst the Government valuation of Balclutha had ODly increased £17,000. A voico i “ Is that through liquor ” ? “ No,” replied Mr Lysnar, but it is with tho pcoplo and their capital remaining with us. Theso would not stop with us if Prohibition were carried. They will not submit to this disceitful and improper way of doing businoss. He went on to show how a .Dunedin businoss man who wont to Balclutha folt whon ho had visited and was very nearly caught in a sly-grog shop. “ I never felt so ashamed and degraded in my life than I did at that moment, and I would not go through it again for ,£50,” was tho confession he mado to a friend. “If you have Prohibition you will have to get used to all that sort of thing. It drives out all the manliness that is characteristic of the British race. Wo do not want to make men sneaks. Let us have it that wo can go in and got it in a straightforward way.” (Applauso and cheers.) Continuing, Mr Lysnar relatod an incident that occurred during a visit he had mado to one of the Coastal townships. He had had occasion to lay a complaint to tho Licensing Bench in regard to a particular house, the result of the complaint being that tho licenseo had not been ablo to got a license anywhoro in New Zealand. This, he contended, he could not have done if the district had been under Prohibition. Undor Prohibi-

tion, travellers would receive very poor accommodation.

Tho profits mado by residents in the Balclutha district in connection with the sale of liquor woro also touchod upon. Tho speakor pointed out that a cask of liquor which cost £4O was ofton turned into threo cask 3 and realised £360, while tho quality of the stuff sold was anything but fit to drink. By voting Prohibition, they made all tho poor men drink this rubbish.

“ Thoy can tako it or leave it ” and “ There will be no poor men when Prohibition is carried ” wero remarks from the audience.

“I am afraid there will bo more poorer men,” replied Mr Lysnar. “You will havo to pay higher wages then. You will not bo ablo to get mon to work for 30s a week,” came from the front seat.

Mr Lysnar thon wont on to deal with tho Prohibition lecturers, who had addressed tho Gisborno public. Ho passed ovor Mr Buckingham, because ho had not dealt with tho merits of tho question, but only with tho sontimontal sido, He combated Mr Elliott’s remarks in regard to Clutha.

At this stago, tho meeting became somewhat disorderly, thore being constant interruptions and a good deal of disorder.

At last Mr Lysnar turned to ono gentleman and said, “ Look here Mr , I am paying for this hall, and if you want to address the audience you must have an evening for yourself.” This remark was received with prolonged cheering, after which Mr Lysnar added : 11 Those people havo been driving Prohibition into you for the last throo years, and what interruptions havo they had. Why, none at all, and I am now trying to undo their work of three yoars. I ask them to keep their own counsol. I know that lam treading on their corns. They try to deny theso facts, but they cannot. (Cheers). Mr Lysnar proceeded to deal with the statements made by the Eev. Elliott in regard to Clutha, and advised the audience to wait until a more practical remedy than Prohibition was at hand. He considered that tho damage to the moral character of those who visited sly-grog shops was greater than any evils arising from tho present system. He admired Mrs Harrison Leo’s tactics, but considered that she was on the wrong track, and really did not know herself where she was going to. At some length Mr Lysnar went on to show that Prohibition was a most ungodly reform. Ho quoted tho opinion of Lady Somerset, herself a tomperanco reformer, to show that she despaired of assistance from Almighty God on behalf of the cause sho so enthusiastically advocated. Mr Lysnar read a letter from a lady in Gisborno who asked him that if ho had two sons going to the Devil through drink, would he continue to lecture for the publicans. Tho said lady also asked that God in his mercy would open Mr Lysnar’s oyes to tho evil ho was working. Mr Lysnar again most emphatically denied that ho was in any way working for tho publicans, and ho thanked God that in his mercy Ho hnd opened his oyes to tho ovils that would likely to come upon the dis- , trict if Prohibition wero carried. In the

momorablo words of Bishop Julies, it would beget worse evils than drunkenness. Mr Lysnar had a good hold on his audionco throughout, and on resuming his soat, ho was loudly applauded. In answor to questions, Mr Lysnar said that at the second poll in Clutha tho publicans joined hands with the prohibitionists to vote out tho single license thatremained. Ho was aware that the cost of gaols, asylums, and deserted wives was at tho present time considerable, and that it was in a measure due to tho drink traffic, but ho contended that matters would bo ten times worse undor prohibition. He instanced some of tho prohibited States in America in support of this. Ho was not prepared to moot Mr F. Isitt on tho public platform and discuss tho success of prohibition in Clutha, but ho was quite prepared to meot Mr Elliott, who had addressed tho Gisborno public on the question. Ho did not meet Mr Elliott whilst that gentteman was in Gisborno because he (Mr Lysnar) was too busy. On tho night of Mr Elliott’s Clutha meeting ho had to attend tho Parliamentary banquet, but be had sent a reporter to tho meeting and obtained full notes. Ho considered that he had done tho district more good in entertaining tlio members of Parliament than in meeting Mr Elliott. Ho had discussed -the prohibition question with tho members of i Parliament, all of whom entirely agreed i w ith him. They, however, pointed out to ■ him that tho country was satisfied with - the reform that they had, and until the

I voice of the people asked for something olso Parliament could not intervene. On the motion of the Chairman a hearty vote of thanks wa3 accorded to Mr Lysnar for his interesting addross, whilst cheors wero also given for the lecturer.