NO-LICENSE

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2346, 12 November 1908, Page 7

NO-LICENSE

[To the Editor.]

Sir, —There are women .and women in every community. Judging from the letter “Total Abstainer’s’’ >nomde plume is a- misnomer. The whole tenor of the letter was wafted round the street corner before it reached your columns. It is self-refuting on account of bias, and the writer fails to see “that an evil winged is an evil scotched.” Much of the sly-grog shop bogey and drinking in the house is wearing too thin to he believed by sensible people, for the reason that the sources from which such stories find their birth are not sources where veracity and truth are cultured. “Total Abstainer” has no doubt the Nolicense people “set,” irrespective of any good qualities they may or may not possess, hut when we are told “the drunkard does not try to cover his faults, it is as open, as day,” wo know that this is not always the truth. There are many of our every day acquaintances who are ashamed, and the failing is encouraged and 1 fed by free access to the open bar, which could not otherwise he the case. Perhaps “Total Abstainer” has in mind those irrecla.mables who have lost all sense of decency and respect, and for them she advocates continuance. —is it not glorying in "a shame for the sake of notoriety, when it affects our country and its people ? Our national shame is our national disgrace. Every day our court records are telling us this, and there is a responsive throb that finds its echo in many a true mother’s heart, in the thought that the day is dra wing near when the efforts of those who are endeavoring to remove the open bar and its evil results will meet with joyful success, knowing that many a home will again experience the joy and happiness that was their former lot, before dad became a frequenter of the open-bar.— I am, etc., “NEW ZEALANDER.”

[To the Editor.] Sir, —Mr Sheridan rushes into print in your issaie of to-day and accuses line of making an abusive statement at our meeting in To Arab Sir, I shall ask Mr Sheridan to withdraw his account of my statement, for it is utterly untrue. What did occur is this. I had that day received Mr Sheridan’s leaflet in wnich he claimed to have- had no interest in iliquor for the last twenty-two months. That statement was not questioned by me; my only remark being that Mr. Sheridan had had a wine and spirit business in the town .and had also been the reputed owner of the Morere hotel. If Mr Sheridan refuses to accept this statement I shall ask Mr Glias. Gibson and Mr. Lamb to certify to my version. .Sir, it is a bad business which requires to be bolstered up by false statements as instance this case, also Mr Lysnar’s statements re the Finlay interview. Mr Finlay has time and again denied Mr Lysnar’s account of what transpired at that interview. Why does he still persist in outraging common decency m this way Then again at Mr Lysnar’s meeting in the Theatre, lie said one of the No-license leaders had come to him and offered to put him up for Mayor if he would- come over to his side. This statement was challenged by. me at the moment, whereupon Mr Lysnar said “He had forgotten who it*was.” Now, Sir, the truth is this: My Geo. Lysnar came to me and asked if I would use my influence on his brother’s behalf. I replied: “No, certainly not.” Hojsaid : “I suppose your difficulty is his attitude on the No-license question. I replied-: “Yes, principally, though lie seems to have a bias against everything that is good.” To this he said: “Douglas has given a promise to take an absolutely neutral attitude on the Nolicense question if elected Mayor.” Now, Sir, I have known Mr W. D. Lysnar for about 19 years, and any experience of him has been that it is next to impossible for him to deali with any subject fairly or impartially. For such a man I have no time. —I am. etc., FRANCIS STAFFORD.

[To the Editor.] Sir, —In your paper of the 7th inst., I notice two letters written by Mr. W. D. Lysnar, of your town, to the Rev. L. Dawson Thomas. The first Tetter, which, is dated July Ist. 1904, and which any right-minded or impartial person could not take exception to, brings forth a reply from the rev. gentleman which i.s positively rude, to say the least of it, and certainly not what one would expect to receive or hear from a minister of the gospel. The second letter, dated July 4th. 1904, from Mr. Lysnar to the rev. gentleman, to my mind, was tliat of a perfect gentleman, in which he says:—“Forgive me for jnaking any comments on this head, .as you are my vicar, but the spirit and tone of your reply struck me as strong in sequence. Permit me to say that I did not write to you with any heatl or personal feeling.” Now, what answer did the Rev. Thomas give? I hope and trust every woman and mother in the Bay will read these two letters and their answers. I Avonder if the rev. gentleman has* ever read a book entitled “In His Steps?” If he has not my advice to him ivould be to read it, and then Ave might see Avhat influence it would have on him. To my simple mind, Avheni an Anglican Church! minister agitates at -street corners he ceases to be a real minister of the Church of God, by setting class against class. Avhy do our bishops alloAV ministers of the Church to take any part whatever in political meetings arid stir up strife? If this kind of- thing continues the people will cease- to respect the Church) and its ministers.—l am etc. ' “CHURCH-GOER”