PROHIBITION PROPAGANDISTS.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVIII, Issue 1036, 13 January 1910, Page 20

PROHIBITION PROPAGANDISTS.

THEIR DOUBTFUL MORALS AND , ; , ~ METHODS. METHODIST PARSON’S “ HOME JOURNAL” TACTICS. “ People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.” That most excellent proverb is one that our Prohibitionist friends (save the mark!) should bear in mind ere entering upon the new campaign they are planning for themselves. They should not, moreover, forget that they can only lay claim to a monopoly of the graces and virtues, and to rank as better men and women than their adversaries, in so far as they can support the assertions they make against them. The man who slanders and vilifies his opponents may, for a time, escape general condemnation; but, in the long run, when his conduct is seen in its true perspective, he loses caste irretrievably and is found to be the thing of clay he really is, rather than the angel of light and liberty that he claims to be. AN INTERESTING RESURRECTION. Some two months prior to the last General Election, an article appeared in the now dead and buried publication, “ The Home Journal,” which has a considerable bearing upon the theory and actual operation of No-li-cense, compared with tne true doctrine of Prohibition, and therefore a resurrection of portions at least of that article may be warranted. They certainly afford an interesting commentary upon Prohibitionist morality and tactics. The article was, by the way, signed by one “ Leonard M. Isitt,” who is, we believe, identical with the one-time Methodist parson of that name. Not only was it signed iby that gentleman (save the last word), but in order that he might emphasise the points he conceived he was making against the “ Trade,” he added this note to.his signature:— “ I sign this article that I may take full responsibility for its charges.” The article itself dealt with tne visit of the American fleet to Auckland, and is not only grP'hsly libellous in its incidence, and distinctly untrue, but is couched in . such terms that any and every hotelkeeper in Auckland might have prosecuted the ex-Methodist parson for criminal, libel, or. in the alternative have sued him under civil process for damages. They would have been well within, their rights in doing so. But the article, or, rather, the portions, of it we reproduce here (it is too long to be given in; its. entirety) may be left to speak for themselves. THE VISIT OF THE AMERICAN FLEET. Fleet Week,' with' air its;excitement, its teeming crowds,,its banners and illuminations, its banquets- and entertainments, is over. Our cousins of the United States have come and gone. The mighty fleet that Crept so silently into our harbour in the grey mist of the Sunday morning glided still more silently out, for not even a saluting gun fired its farewell shot as the great war engines' left the Waitemata, and now all that is left are memories sad and pleasant, and the confident hope that the cordial welcome given by New Zealand to America’s sons must result in deepened regard and closer friendship between John Bull and Father Abraham. Right good fellows we found many of our visitors to be, and tne men who were privileged to spend an evening with the chaplains of the fleet at the dinner given by Mr. Caughey at the Pacific Club will carry with them through all the years to come a very high estimate of the American Navy ch'anlain. Of the rank and file of the men we formed; a very good opinion. We trust

we' dislqyaUwhen we say that in v judgment ’ they , were quite up to..the_Jevel of. a- British .fleet, hastily recruited under similar circumstances. For the most part they were mere boys, drawn from the village farm or city street, as the case happened. Many of them fine, clean-minded, steady lads, some as rough and low in talk and thought as many of the hoodlums that are to be found in our Auckland streets. Of one thing wo are confident, that if no open liquor bars had been in waiting to lure these lads into evil, Admiral Sperry could have turned them all loose upon us, at once abolished his truncheoned pickets, and still harmony and good-fellow-ship would have prevailed. Drink, strong drink, was the one element, the only discordant element, in the week’s proceedings. But for the greed of publicans and brewers, every man in the fleet and every visitor to the city would have had a good time, been benefited by tne experience, and received good value for any money spent; but the vile liquor bar intervened, drunken men and women staggered in dozens along our streets, and on Wednesday especially the scenes witnessed were both distressing and repulsive. As we have said

elsewhere, the navy men, even in their cups, were not on the whole of a quarrelsome’ type, but the vile beer and viler whisky served out- to them would make a rabbit spit in the face of a bull-dog, and on Wednesday we saw eight fights occur in the space of fifteen or twenty minutes. It will be news to our readers, however, that the gentlemen in the community who were most shocked by the reprehensible conduct of the American sailors were some of our worthy and respectable publicans. We make this statement on the authority of a gentleman with whom we travelled to Mt. Albert ..in the .9.45 train on Saturday evening, August 15th. He did not know who the writer of this article was : when he saw him, and after volunteering the statement that he the Canterbury representative for two Auckland papers, he told us in impressive tones mat certain publicans of his acquaintance were horrified by the filthy talk and habits of the American sailors. We only said “Indeed!” We wanted to say so much that we only said “Indeed!” very sweetly, and waited for more. But more did not come.' Still, is more wanted? Think of it ! Ye gods and little fishes, think of it!, . The Auckland publicans complaining of the bad language of the wicked American sailorman! What loathsome cant ! Could Pecksniff,

Uriah Heep, and Stiggins combined equal this? What you! you drink-sellers of Auckland, who for weeks before were preparing your snares, engaging your touts, laying in your stock of poisons; who decorated your drink dens win, mottoes of welcome and national flags for the express purpose of enticing Jack into your webs, that you might fleece him of money, self-respect, and reputation. You, who made these men drunk by the score, and then hustled them out lest they should disgrace you! You, who would, if you could, have made the whole 15,000 .drunk, reckless of everytning except your own filthy gain, have the brazen impudence to cant about the terrible language of these low sailormen. Talk about Satan reproving after this. But, gentlemen, were the members of the American navy the only men who, inspired by the beverages you supplied them with, talked profanely ? Were not your pure ears offended, your righteous souls vexed, by a large number of New Zealand visitors who, succumbing to your ensnarements, reeled and staggered through tne streets, cursing, quarrelling, vomiting over the footpaths; sat huddled up against the walls of your dens, or propped them-

selves up to your window sills; crawled away to back streets, dark corners, and vacant lots, to lie like dead men, recovering from the effect of your poison ? I say again, that after the disgrace your vile business inflicted not only upon Auckland, but the whole Dominion; after the greedy recklessness with which you supplied liquor to men who had already had more than enough; for you to talk of the bad, language you induced, is cant of a sickening nature. And hear one man’s honest opinion of your business: I say deliberately, I would ratner spend all my life as a street scavenger, earning a weekly pittance by cleansing the gutters and streets of Auckland, than I would be the wealthiest of you, bedecking my wife and children with finery thieved from the pockets of muddled men; for, while the Government may legalise your trade and call it honest, every decent man and woman who watched its effects during Fleet. Week, and saw poor silly men, stupified with liquor, fooling away, in an hour or two the wages of weeks, felt that no legislation can make the trade in strong drink other than it is—a vile trade, the very sum of all villainies; a trade that robs its customers of everything noble'and' virtuous, and leads them firito , aIL that is . degraded; a traiel'that disgraces , the men who engage in it, the country

that legalises it, and the community that permits it to be driven in their midst. May God move the people of this Dominion to its speedy ending.

I sign this article that I may take full responsibility for its charges. LEONARD M. ISITT. • • • • . ~ BEARING FALSE WITNESS. There are scores, Hundreds, we might even say thousands, of reputable men and women in Auckland who know that this fanatical outburst, this abusive tirade against and wholesale condemnation of the Auckland publicans is as unjustifiable as it is dishonest, reprehensible, and maliciously untruthful. But it is the sort of pabulum with which the Prohibitionist agitator elects to feed the credulous minds of the multitude. It is the style of argument we shall hear used ad nauseum during the next eighteen months or more. Auckland’s alleged infamy, its allegedly vile publicans —the greater number of them better, truer, more generous men than, those who so grossly libel them and theirs —their. “ greedy recklessness” - and “ filthy gains,” and so on and so on, will be magnified and form the-

subject of many a horrible story with which the chadbands of the Prohibitionist party will regale select audiences. By the way, there is more than a touch of insolent bravado in Leonard M. Isitt’s references to Pecksniff, Uriah Heep and Stiggins. All three professed themselves to be good Christians. and worthy citizens of the Isitt type. The immortal Stiggins was a parson —we are not sure that he did not belong to the same sect as “ Leonard M. Isitt” —and a temperance lecturer to . boot. Hypocrites of the first water he and they all were, no doubt; but, unless we are very much mistaken they could easily be matched from the ranks of those who advocate Prohibition to-day. * * * * THEY DON’T WANT PROHIBITION. Lest any reader of this article should consider we have erred ,in our estimate of “ Leonard M. Isitt” and his friends, let them carefully ponder over. the significant fact, previously emphasised in these columns, and. again disclosed in the following excerpt from the “ New Zealand Times” of Saturday, January Bth, that the advocates of “No-license” and “Prohibition” are afraid to stand their ground and carry their propaganda to its., logical and natural conclusion. They are too fearful, too mean-spirit-

ed. to let the public grasp tne true, significance of their attitude on the liquor question. They want to make the importation, manufacture and sale of alcoholic liquors impossible in this country, and they are afraid .to say so —afraid to accept the straightout issue of “No-license, no liquor,” even when their opponents practically concede them nine points of the game. Such pusillanimity disgusts honest men, and , the fact should be emphasised again and again that the No-li-cense advocates are afraid of the issue they themselves have raised. ±iere is what the “New Zealand Times” says.in its “Current Topics column: —Proposals were recently formulated by Mr. J. S- Palmer, president of tne, New Zealand Licensed victuallers’ Association, for an alternative compromise between the No-license party and, the trade on the basis of (a) discontinuing the taking of a local no-license poll and substituting therefor a Dominion prohibition poll; (b) embodying a State control issue in the ballot paper; (c) a bare majority to carry any issue; (d) six years’ notice to quit in the event of prohibition being carried. It was suggested in regard to present “ dry” areas that votes for restoration should count for continuance and votes for non-restoration for Dominion prohibition, and that in the event of continuance for the Dominion being carried all “ dry” areas

should revert to license. Unofficial views elicited by a “ Times” reporter from prominent No-license men indicate that there is no likelinood of the party agreeing either to sacrifice the local option poll or to put State control as an issue. The suggestion that an aggregate continuance and restoration majority should involve reversal to license, irrespective of the nature of the verdict in the individual electorates, is regarded with special disfavour. Opinions differ as to what would be the effect on other votes of the State control issue being put. One of those interviewed avowed his belief that more votes would tnus be 1

to the trade than to prohibition, whilst others were inclined to think the departure would be inimical to the party’s interests.