Proverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, FRIDAY, JUNE 10, 1892. THE TEMPERANCE LEAGUE, MR LEWIS, AND THE HERALD.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XIX, Issue 6690, 10 June 1892, Page 2

Proverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, FRIDAY, JUNE 10, 1892. THE TEMPERANCE LEAGUE, MR LEWIS, AND THE HERALD.

On Tuesday ufternoon the Temperance League held a meeting, and a brief account of the proceedings was furnished us the next day by a gentleman present, whose veracity we would not think of questioning. His report concluded with the following paragraph : — The promise of the Chairman of the Licensing Bench to again renew one of the licenses next year, if the police report was the same as for the other houses, was considered to be an excess of his functions, and consequently void and useless. Well, it certainly did not appear to us that there was anything libellous or damaging in the above, but Mr Ilanry Lewis, Chairman of the Licensing Bench, thinks otherwise, and his solicitor has sent us the following letter : — Dear Kir, — I am instructed to draw your attention to the report of the proceedings of the Committee of the friends of temperance under the heading "Gisborne Temperance League," published in the Poverty Bay Herald of the Bth, instant, and to inform you that the Chairman of the Licensing Committee (Mr Lewis) considers the latter part of such report not only absolutely untrue, but imputes to him (if not by implication to the other members of the Licensing Committee) conduct which could not be justified by him (or them) if true. Mr Lewis did not promise " to renew one of the licenses next year if the report of the police was the same as for the other houses." What lie did say when the license was granted by the Committee is correctly stated in the report of the proceedings of the Licensing Committee, published in the Herald of Saturday last, the 4th instant, which you can refer to. The publication of such a statement has been a surprise to him, as well as to many of his fellow-citizens, amongst whom he has lived and carried on business for many years. Assuming the statement complained of was, as alleged by you, made by members of the Committee of the friends of temperance (which I can scarcely believe, as I think the community as a whole condemn drunkenness, but may differ as to the best means of stopping the evil), still you must know that such would not justify you in publishing it. Its publication has not only injured the feelings- of an innocent man who has honestly without fear or favor done his duty, but has tended to injure him in his reputation. The law will give redress to a person so injured. I have therefore, on behalf of Mr Lewis, to request you to publish an ample apology in the next issue of the Herald expressing your regret for the publication of such a false statement regarding him ns that complained of. I sincerely trust that your usual sense of fair play and justice will enable you to comply with this request. We experience some difficulty in treating the matter seriously, but Mr Lewis is .1 citizen who has long served the public in various capacities. He is a Borough Councillor of many years' standing, and now occupies the responsible position of Chairman of. the Licensing Bench. Despita the nature of his lawyer's letter, we are disposed to treat him with every consideration. Now, Mr Lewis, don't you think that this passage of that letter contains something more than an itiuendo : — Assuming the statement complained of was, as alleged by you, made by the members of the Committee of the friends of temperance [which I can scarcely believe, as I think the community as a whole condemn drunkenness, but may differ as to the best means of stopping the' evil), still you must know that such would not justify yoxi in publishing it. It is true that we libel ourselves by publishing the letter, but we can afford the disgrace. Nothing need be said here in the way of an apology for giving publicity to a matter which was discussed at the Temperance League, though we trust to say something further on which may soothe the wounded feelings of the particularly sensitive Chairman of the Licensing Bench. Had we suppressed the paragraph, we would owe an apology both to the public and the League, and be in the unfortunate position of not being able to present any extenuating circumstances. Had the paragraph been manufactured by us, the Temperance League would have quite as much reason to complain as Mr Lewis. When we first read the paragraph, the thought at once rose that the League had put too wide a construction on the remarks of the Chairman in granting the renewal for theTuranganui Hotel. His words were a caution and not a promise, and would probably have been uttered whether a temperance agitation was afoot or not. But Mr Lewis was discharging a public function, and surely his remarks are open to comment, so long as his critics do not impute unworthy motives. There was nothing uttered personally damaging to the Chairman of the Committee in the discussionof the League. At the worst, he was misunderstood. But supposing tho Bench had specifically promised the applicant that her license would be renewed the following year if her hotel earned a good report, they would have only been in a measure anticipating the moßt material point in Mr Lewis's letter which appeared in tho Herald of Wednesday. In that letter he says : — " We [the Committee] did not consider that there were too many hotels in the borough, there being no more than there were 6fteen or sixteen years ago, and the population and travelling public have fully trebled since then." Now,

that m<w reasonably bo taken t» bo ft promiHerf) every hot«lkoeper in Oisborno who conducts business in a creditable manner that the license will be renewed next year. Neither Mr Lewis nor anybody else can anticipate a decline in th» population of tho. town during the next twelve months. Surely, a Committee holding such an opinion would not take away the license from an applicant who came before them with a good report. Moreover, the Licensing Committee would have been quite justified in giving jiii indication at the annual meeting of their futurb policy. This has been done throughout the country, but, of course, it is always understood that the Bench do not morally or legally bind their successors. In conclusion, we desire to stake that both sides will get n fair hearing in the Herald.