THE REV. F. W. ISITT STRIKES A SNAG.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume IX, Issue 674, 5 February 1903, Page 22

THE REV. F. W. ISITT STRIKES A SNAG.

In our issue of Ja uury 22 H appea ecl a paragraph to the effect tiu; a statement by the l ev F. W. Isitt, that “ the average publican of thirty, of twen'y, or even cf ten years since, was more agrantly and openly lawless than is the publican of to-day,” was accepted by “ C vie,” the clever contributor to the Ctago Daily limes Since then Mr Ditt has written the folio ing letter to “ Civis” :— sir—You have confused isoii. s in your reply to my letter challenging your Blub-ment that “prohibitionists are mainly responsible lor the progressive demoralisation of the pubiian and the public-house ” I hve not said that the publican is “ iapidly improving,” nor th’at “the public house is being progressively elevated and purified ” A horse is no better bred, though he may be better behaved, because he has a bit >n his mouth .•nd is tightly reined It is not my duty to judge the puolican, ev< n if I regard myself as charged with a responsibility to oppose hie trade. That the trade is less flagrantly law. less than it was is capable of easy proof. That it is being really “ elevated and punfi d” is another question. It stands self-convicted of lawnessnees and of the progressive pcnitance of a growing fear. Eight and a-half years ago, in June, 1894—i.e., shortly after the first local option poll, “ certain owners,” as they styled themselves, wrote to their tenant licensees offering to remit one seventh of the rent paid if those tenants would agree to “ confine themselves to six instead of seven days’ trade” per week. In the same year licensed victuallers, through their associations, agreed that strict attention must be paid to the liceming laws ; members must report offences to the executive, and fines of £lO and upwards should be imposed on offenders. Last month, with two shar, er lesions than that of 1894 in mind, similar resolutions were affirmed; and I can hear of no smaller penalty being named than £5O.

Jio o*her trade openly accuses itself of systematic law-breaking 1 ki.ow of no other that needs to do so. The liquor traffic has biways been, and is everywhere, law-defiant, so far as n,y knowledge goes If you, Sir, can tell me of any exception 1 shall be glad to inquire into it. It is immeasurably more lawless in tiouth Carolina under State-ownerehip than in 1 ew Zealand. Gtothenberg, where it is partially under company control, is much more drunken than any New Zealand city. Russia, with Stale ownership, is in worse plight than before Even the strict rule of the St,ate under the British army, canteen system is powerless to prevent gross abuses. % These facts are as capable of proof as my former assertions which you accepted so readily. Will you not c ose this correspondence by frankly apologising to the prohibitionists for the reckless inaccuracy of the charge you brought against them and so promptly withdrew on the unsupported assertion of yours obediently, Ehamc W Isitt, Secretary of the New Zealand Alliance. This epistle is duly inserted in “ Massing Notes” in the Times, with the following comments by “Civis”: —

“Not every man would so unconcernedly accuse himself of an ‘ unsupported assertion. 1 The Aust tslian boomerang, when unskilfully " thrown, comes back t> clout the thrower’s own head .Mr isitt’a letters to ‘ Civis’ have the same very . asily seen : — , z “ Tsitt : The publican of a generation back was immeasurably worm than the publican of ■C-.-j.-ltp-day. ■" Ctvjs. then the publican of to-day is imfm?.meisurably better than the publican of a generaback. “ Isitt : That is unfair; you confuse the . ' issue. ’ ■ » -’{‘The confusion, I venture to think, is Mr k“l-Ioi.tt’s. The issue may be left to take care of 1 itself; there is nothing wrong with the issue. Mr Isitt that is confused, and with reason; hia faithless boomerang doubling back has boxed ' hifl .own ears. And now we come to the ‘ unsjipporied assertion.’ The epistle with which he C-fJavours me this week contains assertions many varied —about publicans and the Licensed Association ; about South Carolina, -. . Gqthenberg, Russia, and the British canteen • finally about myself and the ‘ reckless B&jicouracy’ of the charge that I made ‘ and so promptly withdrew on the unsupported assertion 'of y°urs obediently, Frank W. Isitt. 1 ‘ Unsup/.C. .ported assertion’ is good, so ve>-y good that there is only one way in which it could be bettered—add an ‘ s ” and apply it to the letter as a whole. The proverb about black sheep holds good of every walk in life If I were to say that I had encountered black sheep parsons and black sheep prohibitionists, Mr Isitt at once would, admit his own experience to be the same. There are, undoubtedly, black sheep publicans. On the other hand, there are publicans who, in every particular save one, must be pronounced good citizens, Mr Isitt himself being judge. True, ho asserts that ‘ the liquor traffic has always been, and ie everywhere law-defiant.’ I don’t forget that. z But neither do I forget the ‘ unsupported asser tion’ clause. Shall I refuse him the benefit of so’generous an admission ? Let us be charitable and believe that Mr Isitt himself would concede the possible existence of a publican who, in every particular save one, might be a good and useful citizen. And what is that one damnatory particular ? It is that the publican sells poison across the counter to all comers. But please observe that * poison’ is Mr Isitt’s word, not mine. How should it be, when 1 have been consuming that poison any number of years, on and off, yet 1 still survive to testify ? The law doe’s not hold the publican’s commodity to be poison, nor does science, nor the Bible, nor the common: sense of universal mankind, but only

Mr Isitt and his p ohibifionist following. 1 conclude, thceforr, I hat >n view of the law, the Bible, human science, and huumii common sense, the publican may be a good citizen, not merely in all respects save ore but in all respects without exception. But about th' se black sheep. Here is a publican, let us suppose, who learns that the prohibitionist pulpit (Hid platform incessantly denounce his business as intrinsically immoral and not likely to last long. 1 All right,’ he says; ‘ forewarned is forearrne i.’ Brom that point, good-bye o any lingering bc uple. The money he has put into this doomed business must by book or by' crook be got out again before the business rtis-.pponre Break the law ! —why shouldn’t he break the law provided he can do it safely ? Being already, if he bdieves the prohibitionist, about, as bad as he can be, the ordinary motives to self respect and good behaviour are denied him .And so we come back to the point fr m which we set out, that for the progressive demoralisation of the publican and the publichouse the prohibitionists are mainly responsible. ’