GILLIES Y. KERR,

Temuka Leader, Issue 2373, 23 June 1892, Page 4

GILLIES Y. KERR,

At Timaru, on Tuesday evening, the debate between the Rev. Win. Gillies, and Mr E. G. Kerr (Chairman of the Timaru Licensing Committee), on the subject of the actions of thq Licensing Committee, took place in the Theatre Royal, Timaru. The largo building was c 'owded, even the stage being filled, and among those present, were a number of ladies. His Worship the Mayor (Mr A. Sherratt) presided. The meeting was on fie whole fairly orderly, but interruptions were by no means rare, and the applause at times most vehement. The debate lasted from eight o’clock until a quarter to eleven (Mr Gillies speaking until twenty-five minutes past ten.) It was consequently too long for us to report in full.

In his opening statement, the chairman explained that at the animal prohibition meeting, in Timaru, Mr Gillies had made certain statements; amongst others he had said that the Licensing Committee had not done llieir duty. At the licensing meeting a few days afterwards, the chairman of the committee repudiated the statements made by Mr Gillies, and characterised them as misleading and untrue. (Hoar, hear.) After this Mr Gillies invited the chairman to a public kmeeting, and Mr Gillies would that evening endeavour to show that his statements were not slanderous and untrue; and Mr Kerr, that the committee had carried out their duties strictly and in accordance with the law, and to the satisfaction of the ratepayers who had elected them to sit on the bench. Mr Gillies opened the debate amidst a medley of applause, hissses, and hoots. After alluding to a debate between Messrs Gladstone and Disraeli, in the House of Commons (during which he was frequently interrupted), he spoke of the correspondence and of the matters ultimately leading up to the charge made by Mr Kerr against himself. He (Mr Gillies) had been branded before them as a w vindictive slanderer and a liar.” (A voice “ You’re not one.”) Was he not to he allowed to speak of these matters • He begged to assure Mr Kerr and his brother commissioners that he did not .bear the slight personal animosty to him or them; that there was no spark of animosity in his breast in connection with this matter, either in the correspondence which had passed or what was to be said at the meeting. (Applause). He gave them proof of this by stating that on the libellous statement being made that he was a vindictive slanderer and a liar, lie did not at once take and put Mr Kerr into the Supreme Court. The man who had clean hands and a clean conscience could afford to be generous. By the appearance of statements regarding a fellow citizen, who had been 17 years before the public, Mr Kerr had put a foul blot upon his name—(uproar)—and if he had not the manliness to retract and apologise for that statement publicly that night that foul blot would be made indelible. (Voice : “ No, no ” ; applause and uproar.) Mr Gillies next said that he was present to discharge a great public duty—a duty he owed to the community at large, and a duty he owed to the victims of this traffic. (Applause and uproar.) He was delighted to meet Mr Kerr; he liked to say to a man’s face what he had to say. His charges were specific ones. He would put them one by one, and the first one was as follows :—That the commissioners had wilfully set at defiance any reference to section 113, part two, and subsequent sections of the Act, in not seeing that the clerk kept a register, called “ the register of licenses.” Air Gillies read the section, showing that the register must contain particulars as to licenses granted, records of convictions, of all applications made to the committee, &c. No such register had been kept for 11 years. Such an offence was a misdemeanor, and was punishable at law. (Mr Kerr : “ Why not prosecute ? ”) Mr Gillies replied that he was not “ vindictive.” Ho wanted them to realise that this non-keeping of a register w is no light or trivial offence. From it extracts were to be sent to other districts j section 45 laid down as one of the duties of the clerk to “search the register,” »o that he might be in a position to lay the fullest information before tho commissioners. Section 119 provided that the publicans should pay Is for having his hotel and name e itered upon ibo register. He did not know whether the publicans had paid their shillings or not, it they had, the c nnmittee had taken the mdUfi/ nn hr false pretences; if they had not, the revenue had been defrauded of ih'-’t money. The register was also to contain a list of convictions, but no such record had been kept. How could the Justices do their duty, or how could ratepayers get information about convictions, when such a register was not kept I From the file of the Timaru Herald, or else the records of the police courts! But they had no business to be put to such trouble. Tho number of drunks in 1890 was 171, and there we>e four cases of selling liquor after hours ; but they could not go and find out the houses those charges were agihist —whether they were against one or more houses. His second charge was that the Commissioners had completely shirked their duty and the responsibilities imposed upon them by the Ace to consider the question of the necessity of so many licensed houses. They had been told that the Act was not a prohibitive Act, but was one for the regulation of the traffic. Did not the Act, ai part of tint regulation of this traffic, contemplate a reduction in tho houses when there were too many j It did so ; but had the commissioners j considered whether or not Timaru rocpiired 13 public houses ? (Cries of “ No” and “ Yes,”) But he was not going to be unfair. The duty and responsibility laid upon them was a very-heavy, difficult, and delicate one to fulfil. At the same time that was no excuse for them shirking their duty and responsibility, (Hear, hear.) (Shortly after this in reply to a remark of Mr Kerr Mr Gillies challenged Air Kerr to contest an election for a seat on the Licensing Committee, and the offer was accepted, to take place two years hence.) The party to which Mr Gillies had associated himself at first proposed a moderate platform ” —a reduction in tho number of houses; 10 o’clock licenses; trict enforcement of the Act respecting Sunday trading, and no conditional licenses. He had interviewed one of the commissioners, who had said that he was I prepared to accept that platform. (Air,

Kerr said it was not him.) Mr Gillies said the Commissioners had an excellent i opportunity to close one of the hotels, (The Empire), which was old and required rebuilding, but they did not do so although it was not required. The “ Gentleman’s Club ” at the Club Hotel was another evasion of the Act. It had been in existence 12 mouths, and the Chairman of the Licensing Bench was a member of it, before he (Mr Gillies) called attention to it, and the Chairman said at once it was illegal, and it was closed. The third charge he had to make was that notwithstanding the strong words spoken by the chairman last year, the bench had acted more as guardians of the publicans than of the public. The committee on that occasion said that they were determined to enforce the Act in all its requirements. He had five cases in which they had not done so, and could prove them. The first was the way in which they dealt with the number of bars. The law allowed for only one bar, but they cwuld not name a hotel in ’Timaru noth only one bar. They might not open upon the street, but they did upon passages in the house. The law distinctly declared that trade illicit which is carried on at any other than licensed bars, and heavy penalties arc provided for it, a fine of not exceeding £SO and a month’s imprisonment for a first offence and heavier penalties for second and third offences. He held it was the duty i of the committee to prosecute. The j third offence of ihis nature involved the i disqualification of the licensee for ever as a license holder. Yet a man had been let off scot free after 300 breaches of the law. The Act provides that the normal closing hour shall be 10 o’clock, and only exceptions shall be 11 o’clock, and the exceptions are to be for the convenience of the public, yet none of the hotels were olosed at 10. It was made a serious offence in the Act to supply the police on duty, and they all knew that was done. A policeman was made drunk on his beat in the town, and turned up at the Herald office, from whence he was taken to the station in a cab. Another very important offence was supplying liquor to drunken men. Would anyone dare say that was not done at every hotel in town 'I And it was not on week days only, but on Sabbath days it was done. Even since this agitation began, a prohibited person came into his church one Sabbath evening the worse for drink. The chairman might say Die committee had only to deal with matters brought before them. But they were allowed by tire Act to initiate proceedings themselves, and to summon any person in town to give evidence on oath, They had neglected these powers in the interests of tho publicans. He charged the police and committee with passing over a misstatement of facts in a statement in the police report that a temporary transfer had been granted to one of tire hotels, when pope had hemi granted, A fee of £2 was to bp paid for a temporary transfer, and no £2 had been paid, so there could bo no temporary transfer granted. These were only specimens, a;;d he had aacksful, but if he hud not already prove;), his words, in spile of interruptions, he would never open his ]ips again. (Applause.) In conclusion Mr Gillies said that abuse of himself personally would be no answer to his charges, nor attacks upon prohibition or prohibitionists; he would have no opportunity to reply, and it was fair that he should guard himself by pointing this out, after making spell great concessions as lie had made. He left himself in their hands, asking for a verdict of “ proven-” He then sat down amid great applause. Mr Kerr rose to rpply amidst a storm of groans, hisses, and cheers, It was usual to listen to the defence of a man against whom charges were made. Ho was not going to slander Mr Gillies, as Mr Gillies seemed to expect, or do anything out of the ordinary way, Hs would not detain them with such an extra; ordinarily Jong address as Mr Gillies had given them, He was there as Mr Gillies’ invited guest. The whole thing arose out of something Mr Gillies had said at a prohibition meeting some time ago, and continued in correspondence in the papers. He made certain accusations against the licensing committee that their words belied their actions. It would simplify matters if lie read what he, as chairman and by the direction of the committee, really did say on the occasion referred to. (Mr Kerr then read from the report of tho Timaru Herald his remarks to the publicans at the annual meeting of the committee last year. The reading occupied some time, and Mr Kerr was frequently interrupted.) He, as chairman, the x’eport said, fold the publicans that the committee W,er« not, as was stated by an extreme section .of i]}s community, a publicans’ committee. They intended to administer the Act as they found it, as an Act not to prohibit but to regulate the sale of liquor. There were complaints of Suuday-trrding, and he asked thff police to exercise a good deal more supervision and try to put a stop to it. The committee would look upon Sundaytrading as a very serious offence, and the licensees were advised to agree to choc their houses altogether on Sundays, even to refusing to supply travellers. Kefercuco was also made to reports concerning gambling affer hours, and the licensees wore warned that l!)u police would bn instructed to put the law force, and the committee would consider the permission of gambling ,as a serious offence. At the following quarterly meeting lie, as chairman, again flvow the attention of tho police to reports that Sunday-trading was going on, and the inspector said he was not aware of it, (Great laughter.) Mr Kerr went on to say that he bad repeatedly drawn the attention of the police .outside the committee altogether to the matter of Sunday-trading, and asked them to investigate. He had told licensees distinctly that anyone of them convicted of Sundaytrading would have his license reduced to 10 o’clock, and on a second offence tiic committee would seriously consider the refusal of his license. (Why didn’t you do it I) At the annual meeting just past the police reported that there had been no convictions during the year against any of the licensees, and no complaints, and thereupon the licenses were renewed. He would ask if they were to punish licensees, or any other person, who had not been proved to be guilty of any offence I It might be said that the committee should act the part of spies, or detectives, or policemen. He denied that any such duty was imposed upon tho committee by the Act, or that there was

anything in the Act tending in that direction. The committee had to act in a judicial capacity—like a bench of magistrates —and they could not be prosecutors and judges at the same time. If the committee were required to spy round as detectives, or peep through keyholes after eleven o’clock, ho would scorn to have anything to do with it. After all the calumny that had been heaped upon Timaru, as being such a drunken place, it was an orderly and well conducted town — (No, no; and great uproar, and “ What about the drunken policeman ! ” His answer to that question was that this was the very first time he had heard anything at all about it. If the man went to his office at night or not, he did not know ; he was not in town at night, and he knew nothing at all about it. In reply to the charge that the committee always renewed licenses and never punished licensees, ho mentioned the case of Wilson, a former licensee of the Melville Hotel, who was refused a renewal on grounds, which Mr Kerr explained, arising out of a disturbance in the house, in which a constable was concerned. As to what Mr Gillies had said about offences against the Act, the committee had nothing in the world to do with the matter. After the licenses were granted it was the duty of the police to see that the law was carried out. H any offence was committed it was not brought before the Licensing Committee, but before the Court, and whether a conviction was recorded or not rested with the Bench hearing the ease. So far as the threats of the committee, delivered twelve months ago, were concerned, there had not been one offence recorded against any licensee, and the committee were not going to punish innocent men. (Great laughter, and “ Oh, oh,”) That was his explanation. (Ironical “ Oh, oh.”) As to Mr Gillies’s remarks about granting 13 licenses in Timaru, he (Mr Kerr) held the opinion very strongly, always had, and always would do so, that a committee had no right to destroy any man’s property for the benefit of the community, unless the community v ere prepared to compensate that man for his individual loss. (Marks of strong dissent.) Then as to the Empire Hotel—- (“ Answer the charges ”) —he was answering the charges —Mr Gillies spoke about the plans having been approved by the committee. He told Mr Moore distinctly in the Court that the plans had never been approved by the committee, and when his attention was drawn to the matter by the sergeant-major of police he at once instructed Mr Moore to close up the shop. He had not seen the place before. (“ Oh, oh.”) As to public bars the meaning of the term was defined by the Act. A public bar is a bar having direct entrance from the street, and if any publican had more than one bar, and Mr Gillies or any of his friends thought there was a case against him, let them try it in Court.—(Mr Gillies : It is not our duty.)--Nor Was it the duty of the committee ; certainly not- As to the statement about the temporary transfer of a license, there was no temporary transfer required. If a person desired to take immediate possession of a hotel, he would apply for a temporary transfer, but if he did not take immediate possession he could apply to the Committee wiihin 30 days of a regular meeting and a temporary transfer was not required, Mr Gillies had made a good deal about the fact that a register had not been kept at the Courthouse. A register was kept at the Courthouse. Every offence against every house was entered in the police reports, which were filed alongside the infinite,s of the Licensing Committee, and any person who required Information could get it at any time. He did not intend to detain them any longer —(oh, oh) —they had been kept there a long time listening, he could not say very patiently. However, he was asked to he present to reply to certain charges against the Lipeipsing Committee and whether his answer was satisfactory or not w'as the business of the meeting. He would not detain them further, The Kev. W. J. Williams then came forward and was greeted with a general uproar, when this subsided he proposed the following resolution - “ That this meeting, having heard the charges preferred against the Timaru Licensing Committee by tire Kev. W. Gillies, and having also heard the defence offered by Hr B,’ Q. Kerr, hereby declares that in its judgment the charges brought against the committee have been fully sustaiued a and that by their scandalous laxity in the administration of the law, the committee have shown themselves totally unfit for their position as professed guardians of the interests of the public.” After some interruption, the Kev. E. D. Cecil asked had Mr Gillies been proved to be a liar and a slanderer ? Tp t]us there was a roar of Noes, and then Mr Cepi) ashed if Mr Kerr would apologise, a question which the audience answered with mingled pries of Yes and NoThe chairman palled for a show of hands on tlie motion, when ;i large majority were held up for it, and only a few against it, a result received with cheers. The meeting then terminated,