WAIAPU TEMPERANCE REFORM LEAGUE.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 951, 25 July 1903, Page 2

WAIAPU TEMPERANCE REFORM LEAGUE.

A meeting of the members of the League was held last night. Mr W. F. Somerville presided, and there was a good attendance of members, including Messrs W. D. Lysnar, W. L. Rees, G. Grant, A. Gregg, J. McFarlane, C. F. Lewis, R. ivl. Birrell, Binnie, U’Ren, and Godfrey. The Chairman, in explaining the object of the meeting, read the following requisition to the President? “ We, the under-signed members of the above League, request you to call at an early date a general meeting of the League, to consider the form of the petition to Parliament, asking for reforms, before it is further proceeded with, as we are given to understand there is disagreement among the sub-committee regarding I the same.—Yours, etc., Kenneth Humphreys, P. McLouglilin, P. Greene, T. Garrett, W. Bell, H. J. Chrisp, Thos. Beil, W. F. Somerville, Clias. Ferris, H. C. Jackson, D. Murray, W. O. Skeet.” After referring to the petition, he called on Mr W. L. Rees to speak. Mr Rees said that the committee previously appointed had drawn up a ; petition which he read. The princi- ' pies enumerated by the League were 1 in conformity with the main petition 1 lie spoke strongly in favor of the petition which advocated reforms now being approved of ail over the civilised world. By deciding that that be the petition the League was doing only that which it had already endorsed. He had seen another petition favored by Mr Lysnar. After reading a letter from Mr Wallis, the speaker then criticised the alternative petition, which he said had been drawn up by Mr Lysnar. Mr Lysnar : That was drawn up by the Rev. Herbert Williams. A question arose as to the different petitions, and it was explained that one had been adopted by, the Committee, while the other, which it had also decided to allow to go forth, enumerated certain remedial measures, including inspection of alcoholic liquors, prevention of non-re-resident persons being on licensed premises after hours, the abolition of barmaids, more licenses in certain defined circumstances, and the breaking up of the monopoly. Mr Rees said that the Rev. H. Williams was at present away, on a call of his office, but he (Mr Rees) understood that both petitions were to go out and be signed. The taking of private profit from the sale of liquor would, he said, be a great reform, while accommodation .would still be provided for the public. He took that to be the object of the League as embodied in the petition adopted by the Committee set up for the purpose, and if it were not, he would no longer remain a member of it. He strongly supported the main petition, and went on to criticise the aternative petition, saying j that 'any reform there indicated was already provided for. As to inspectors, there was no doubt that all lijqUor sold should be good, but that would be included in the reforms ■brought about by public control. In reply to the Chairman, Mr Rees said that it had already been decided that both petitions should be allowed to go forth, and he was only showing that they, were not antagonistic. He intended to move a resolution upnolding the Committee that had been appointed. He had signed the requisition because Mr Lysnar had told him there was gjreat dissatisfaction Mr Lysnar : On my part. Mr Rees : Yes, on your part. If they gave way in this it would mean that one obstinate and ignorant man could rule the whole community. If one man was going to have all his own way in a community they would forfeit their liberty and for the self glorification of one man upset the work of all other men. He had signed the requisition because he did not want to have it go forth that there had been any burking of discussion. He characterised the second petition as a sop to Cerebus—it had been allowed to go forth on account of Mb Lysnar. He moved that the decision of the Committee that both petitions be signed by those iwho cared to do so be carried into effect. Mr Grant seconded the motion. He said that he was one of the Committee appointed to deal with the peti- , tion, and after careful consideration they had decided upon the petition and if they had sufficient confidence in the Committee they appointed, it should be adhered to. * They had all said they were willing to sign Mr Lysnar’s petition, and, as Mr Rees had put it, as “ a sop to Cerebus ” they had agreed to the other petition going forth for signatures, but not to its being embodied with the main petition. Mr Birrell said that before leaving town, Mr Williams had asked for his opinion, in seeking to obtain a consensus of opinion on the subject, and he had told that gentleman he agreed with him, He (Mr Birrell) regarded the A petition as the one of great importance, and thought if they could not get. that essential of public control, it would not be worth while fighting for the B petition. It was well that the two should be allowed to go ‘forth, as some might sign one and not the other. He was sorry to disagree with Mr Lysnar in this matter, but he considered there Was no need for this meeting at all. They were having so much chopping and changing, without a defined programme that the public were beginning to lose all confidence in them, Mr W. D. Lysnar said the matter was a very important one, and he Was sorry that Mr Rees should in- [ troduce bitter personal feeling—the matter was altogether too big and important for any such thing, and they should honestly set about an attempt to carry out the programme of the League., Mr Birrell was mistaken in saying there was no programme. They had had one from the start, and it was in fulfilment of that he (Mr Lysnar) had proposed the remedial measures. All that he asked was that provision for public control and for tbe remedial measures adopted by the League be embodied in the one petition to Parliament, for he very earnestly desired to see these reforms carried, and regretted that there should be any introduction of personal feeling. He cited the heads of the reforms, and claimed that they, were, all cardinal principles, and not merely details, as had been stated. As for" tbeir being laughed out, they were approved by, such men as the Police Commissioner, and he knew would have the approval of many legislators. It could not be said that such questions as breaking up the monopoly, inspection of liquor, more licenses under certain conditions, were matters of detail and not of principle. He was very desirous to see these principles embodied in the petition. He moveded as an amendment that there be only one petition, to include the remedial measures set out in the second petition. He did not ask that any other alteration be made in the first petition, which was for public control This should he done if the Committee were not insincere. “ Not sincere !” exclaimed Mr Grant, warmly. “ Insincere !” added Mr Rees with equal warmth. “We might say you are a charlatan, with a good deal more truth.” Mr Grant protested against such an assertion by Mr Lysnar, adding : “ Everyone of us offered to sign your petition.” .The Chairman said that Mr Lysnar had given an expression o£ opinion. “He said we were not sincere ! ” retorted Mr Grant. Mr Lysnar : I withdraw it. “ And you have no right to allow him to say such things,” added Mr Rees, with warmth. “ I allowed you a good deal • of latitude in what you said about Mr Lysnar.’-i the Cbairnaaa .quietly; reffl&EW ...

Mr Rees : You did not ! I will repeat anywhere what I say about him. 1-le is always accusing people of telling untruths. Mr Lysnar : You called me an obstinate and ignorant man. So you are!” sharoly rejoined Mr Rees.

The Chairman, who remained calm and self-composed, said : “ I think we can drop these personalities and proceed to business.” “ 1 did not commence them,” said Mr ReeS. 11 He commenced them.” Voices : “ Order 1”

Mr Lysnar said that he would withdraw the remark with great pleasure. He had no wish to be offensive— he did not wish to say a word that would give them any ground for complaining. He wished to avoid personalities. 1-le urged that there should be only the one petition, including both the public control provision and the remedial measures. It was on the latter

that he had gone through the district and pledged himself to light

Mr Binnie seconded the motion. He thought it would clear up a certain amount of dissatisfaction, and clearly there could be no harm done. Mr Rees spoke in opposition to the amendment, saying they should be guided by the decision of the committee. He was willing to sign Mr Lysnar’s petition, but objected to the other one being burdened with details. He had been a member of the Legislature when Mr Lysnar was a small boy, and knew. that no Legislature would go into those details. Mr Lysnar said that the League s programme mentioned them. Mr Rees : The programme says nothing of the sort. For reply Mr Lysnar smiled, and glanced at the leaflet he held in his hand.

Mr Rees said that he entered a public protest against any individual attempting to over-ride those with whom he was supposed to work in harmony ; with whom he had been directed by. those lie represeneed to work in concert. He orotested against'anyone attempting to upset the convictions and deliberations o£ the people appointed to carry out a certain course. The amendment was not in the interests of the League or of reform, and if carried they must have the resignations of 'be Committee. The second petition would be signed by not more than twenty people. It was the outcome of one disappointed individual. Mr Binnie : I beg pardon ! Mr Rees : Well, of two. Mr Binnie said that he had not heard any of the discussions, and it was from what he had heard in the street he had formed his opinion. Mr Rees : I say, the opinion of two. Mr Binnie said he had simply seconded the amendment owing to expressions of opinion he had heard outside. Mr Rees : A gentleman comes here whose name I do not know and supports a resolution of which he absolutely knows nothing. Mr Binnie : Only what I heard in the street. Mr Rees Of the oi'an in the street ! Mr Binnie said that ho had heard outside of the division this matter had caused.

Mr Rees : And you come to support it ? Mr Binnie : I do not come to support anything. Mr Rees : It the opinion o£ the man in the street

Mr Binnie : I object to that. Mr Rees (continuing) ; —is allowed to influence the proceedings o£ the Reform League, then the sooner the League is ended the better. Mr Lysnar rose to speak. Mr Rees : Mr Lysnar has already spoken, and I object to his speaking again. . . Mr Lysnar said that his object m rising was, with the seconder’s consent, to withdraw the amendment. After what had fallen from Mr Rees, that the carrying of the amendment would lead to the resignation of the Committee, and probably the ending of the League, he would withdraw amendment. As for its not being in the interests of reform, he said deliberately that what he was doing in this matter was in the interests of the League, and what he believed to be the honest opinion of many members of the League throughout the district. He trusted that the League would never end. Strong as his feelings were he would, in face of the threat made, prefer to withdraw the amendment. The opposition was not biased on the merits of the thing, hut for other reasons Mr Rees : What is being done for other reasons ?

Mr Lysnar said he referred to the I objection to have measures included lin the programme of the League 1 being embodied in the. petition-., Mr Rees : What do you mean T»y I the insinuation that it is not being I done for that purpose ? I Mr Lysnar : You say it is. I , Mr Rees : I say, so, * Mr Lysnar said that Lis motive in asking that the two petitions be em;h|odied in one was in the interests I of the League. I Mr Rees : So you say. Mr Lysnar said that he did not want to see any split in the matter and the two petitions-could go on. Mr Birrell thought that too much prominence was given to the remedial measures—if they got public control the other reforms .would follow. Mr Lysnar was saying he hoped the members would do their best to have the petitions pushed on, when— Mr Rees : How many speeches does Mr Lysnar intend to make this evening ? • The Chairman : Does any gentleman desire to speak to the resolution ? If not, I shall call, upon those in favor of it to vote. The resolution was then put, Mr Lysnar remarking, “ I will vote for it.” The motion was carried. Mr Lysnar : I hope what has passed at the meeting this evening will not cause any member to slacken his efforts ; I will do what I can to push both petitions on. Mr Rees : I am not a member of the Committee, but I am prepared to sign both petitions. The Committee will, I presume, take the necessary steps to get both signed. A vote of thanks to the Chairman terminated the proceedings.