The Weekly comet. [volume] (Baton Rouge, La.) 1853-1855, 1854-08-06

| ments on the question as to whether
the Board Of Selectmen possessed the
legal right to ordor new election in
the second ward to settle the license
question. Your first illumination did
not notice, as | was anxlously waiting
for something of a more decisive ma
ture. You content yourself with de
nying my propositions, and saying that
they themselves contain the elements
Of selfrefutatiop. Why, pray sir, did
you not tell us what those elements
were2 Why did YOU not give us
those reasonable deductions to which
you so felicitously alluded ? | thought
you had studied logic long enough to
be convinced that naked assertions
amount to nothing in reason, and have
10 tendency to convince reasonable
beings Of the error Of their ways But
however, perhaps the deficiencies Of
the first essay arc to be corrected by
the Second.
Well let us see. you say that you
are like "fatted calf "ade ready
for the slaughter Now, sir, whether
Or no you are such a very fat victim,
as you seem to suppose, have not
taken the pains to inquire. For my
self can say truly that | do not feel
halt the propensties of the butcher
that you would ascribe to me. On the
contrary, would much rather find
you like the prodigal son repen'ing of
the errors Of your ways and ready to
pa1takc Of the "fatted calf"
You say that Second Ward gra-
tu,tousiy charges you with &c, &c.
Now sir Second Ward begs that you
will review your language again and
come to the conclusion that all charges
made against YOU are reasonable de
ductions from your own language.
This point however is not worth
discussing Allow me, however to
say that it is hard to keep You to the
point. Pray don't hold me responsi
bic for opinions which | have not
expressed The question between US,
is not as to the expediency of license
or no license 1t is the pure legal
question as to whether the Board Of
Selectmen had the right according tn
law to order new election to settle
the tie in the 2nd ward. You say
they had no such right. | say it was
not only their ri ght but their absolute
duty according to law to do SO.
Let rs look for moment at your
arguments You say the matter
should be settled, or rather remain in
status 1no. as it was until next season,
when the vote may be legally taken
again according to the act
Well now what would be the
status quo situation of affairs of which
you speak, | ask you again, have
you read the law carefully and attcn-
lively If 50, do you not plainly sec
that an affirmative vote OF the people |
is absolutely condition precedent,
to the granting Of the license The
condition then, in which you would
have things remain, would amount
precisely to the same thing as vote
for no license" a state Of affairs
which you do not seem to contem-
plate. Yolr desires carried out will
break up all the bar-rooms without
the people saying so. You speak of
the tyranny of majorities. You would
have the tyranny OF a molety.
If the Board Of Selectmen should
see fit to leave things as they are, you
might talk about arbitrary power, it
seems to me, with some propricty.
repeat as before, that it is the Ii
cense men, whose interest it is to have
a new election. The licenses are stop
ped until vote of the people renew
them.
You seem to grant that my general
views in relation to new elections to
decide tie votes are correct, but you
proceed to deny that a vote Of this
sort is an election. We'll, sir, we will
not dispute about terms-granted that
it is not an election. The law says
that something is to be determined.
Has any thing been determined? In
conclusion {as you wish your cores
pondents to be brieD will say that
the law to any one who will examine