TEA VERSUS BEER

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 13, 16 January 1901, Page 5

TEA VERSUS BEER

A LIVELY DISCUSSION

THE MATTER DEFERRED.

In the course of the Committee meeting- yesterday afternoon, the question of providing- refreshments for the departing- troopers and for the country volunteers was brought up, and Mr Alfred Kidd moved, "That the question of the class of refreshments to be provided by the committee be left to the Refreshment Committee to consider and report to the next meeting."

Mr Wesley Spragg' moved as an amendment, "That in deference to the expressed wish of the Commander-in-chief, it be a recommendation from this meeting that the Entertainment Committee, in making- provision for the luncheon, should not provide any intoxicating liquors." He said he would object to tnl\-e part in anything1 which would help to bring the volunteers to any sort of injury. His firm was anxious to contribute to the funds, but if any portion of the money was to be spent in intoxicating liquors, they could not contribute. A good many people in Auckland had similar scruples. In banishing- intoxicants from the refreshment tables they were only doing- what Lord Roberts had earnestly advocated. Lord Kitchener and Lord Wolseley were of the same opinion.

Mr Graves 'Aiekhi supposed that they would have a sort of substantial" afternoon ten.

Mr Spragg said afternoon tea, was more desirable than some things. He did not question the liberty of a man to drink, if he desired to do so, but it was another matter when he and others were asked to give men that which might hurt them.

Mr Leo. Myers said he considered that Mr Sprtigg was injudicious in bringing in this bone of contention. Mr Spragg was not consistent when lu 1 said lie had no objection to a man taking what he pleased, as he immediately suggested that there should be no alcoholic refreshment on the ground. He did not think that a "fad" of this kind should be introduced on such an occasion. He would certainly, feel it his duty to vote against' Mr Spragg's amendment. Those who desired to keep aloof from intoxicants should be allowed to do

Mr P. Cheal said that a gren'/raany eiti/.eus had conscientious objections to contributing to the funu liriess the luncheon was free from Intoxicants .as far as the committea was concerned. There were some, like himself, who were not of the same opinion as the Prohibitionists, who would yet like to support Lord Poberts' request. If liberal-ir hided men. like Mr Nathan and Mr Myers, caved to send up liquor to the men, there would be no objection.

Mr Geddes suggested, inrdst nome lighter, that the money subser'bod by Mr Spragg and his teetotal friends be used to provide the tea and toast, vhile the money subscribed by others could provide the liquor.

Mr L. D. Nathan said that in flic course of canvassing he' and Mr Geddc!<s had not had a single refusal, and r-o questions had been asked about Ihe class of refreshment that was to he. provided. It was treating the mm like children not to give them alcoholic refreshments.

Mr W. B. Leyland said they should honour the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief. Even if they did not give the volunteers liquor, he did not think they would be insulting them. Lord Roberts said his men were heroes on the battlefield, tind gentlemen everywhere else, and then advised that they should not bo "treated." In doing this he was not insulting the men. They should not ask. anyone to present drink to • the men. They could give the men a lv arty send-off without it.

Mr J. M. McLaehlan said he was not a total abstainer, but he,, could not help agreeing with what Mr Spragg. said. Loyalty to Lord Roberts and the other generals who had warned the public against providing intoxicants should influence the committee's actions. . Lieut.-Commander Clemens, speaking as a volunteer officer, said. the committee should carry Mr Sprat's ! amendment. In volunteer gatherings he had found that one or two would go to excess when intoxicants were provided, and even one or two might mar the-success of the day. Captain A. C. Caughey also urged that Lord Roberts' wishes be respected. The Rev. H. R. Dewsbury coniwicd the opinion expressed that by refusing to put temptation in a man's way they were not treating him as a man. He hoped the amendment would be carried. Commandant Le Roy expressed similar opinions on volunteer gathei'ings to those expressed by Lieut.Commander Clemens. Mr A. Kidd said he"could claim to be as strong a teetotaller as any man in the room, but Lord Roberts' objection to treating* returned soldiers referred mainly to the English army and the men being- sent from this colony were :of an entirely different, class. The colonial youth was not a drunkacd, and he was satisfied that two-thirds of the men at the camp would not take drink if they were offered it. The Mayor then put Mr Sprngg's amendment, when fifteen hands were held up in favour of it, a clear majority1. Mr Geddes asked, if all present were members of the committee. Mr Leo. Myers said the meeting was packed by the Prohibition Party, Mr Spragg said It -was important that billy 'those who were members of the committee should tote. " The Mayor said that it was Mndei'stqod that the committee ftould'add t)6 their number. Any person present, however, who had not been recorded as a member cotlld not vote. Tic

amendment was then put again, when eight voted for the amendment and eight for Mr Kidd's motion. Mr Myers then suggested that as there was a feeling that the meetiug had been packed the matter should be deferred. Mr Spragg then withdrew his amendment and the, whole matter was left to be considered at a meeting on Friday.

DUNEDIN, Tuesday

Captain Fulton, wli'o^ received the command of a company in the contingent, left Dunedin to-day for Wellington, en route to South Africa.. He was given a cordial send off.