The Toledo chronicle. [volume] (Toledo, Tama County, Iowa) 1873-1924, 1874-09-03

The CHRONICLE comments largely on
our prohibition article. This shows how
they look after the interests of the town.
-Independent.
The last weeks CHRONICLE defines its
position on the prohibition question
That position is substantially the same Is
this paper has advocated from the start
Ind.
How are we to take our neighbor!
Where does he stand. 1t is evident that
the intention of the writer of the first
squib quoted above was to slur us because
Of the stand we took upon the temperance
question. In the second squib quoted
he says our position on that question is
substantially" the same as theirs. Who
is ION The fence" now: Why don't mine
friend come out like man, and stand up
on the Iowa Law. He burst not dot. He
is . free uhisksy, free beer, false pretender.
He claims to be an advocate of temper
ance, and that his paper is temperance
organ but not in .facor Of prohibition.
acknowledgements The person is
not temperance man who will keep his
,oine and beer at his place of business,
ready Of access, and free to those who he
is aware will abuse the use of it by get
ting intoxicated Our German friend of
the Marshall Times bantling has recently
been guilty of this, and we are credibly
informed that, he himself became intoxi-
Gated at the time to which we allude, and
the effect on others was even worse We
will not give details. The lawless in
fidel whose name is posted at the mast
head of our neighbor well knows that
what we have stated is true lie is not
temperance man IN theory nor in practice.
His paper is an impious masterpiece Of de-
ception and communism. 1t was recently
condemned at Sunday School Conven-
ton at West Irving in this county, upon
resolution which was introduced by an
Anti Monopolist, and was unanimously
declared by the entire convention land it
was largely attended, to be unfit to take
into the family circle for children to read
because Of its open adcocacy Of free Whis-
Iowa Liquor Law, and demands ats en-
forcement. Toledo has an ordinance per-
hitting the sale of beer and other liquors
not prohibited by the State. That ordin
ance provides for certain restrictions
We believe in the enforcement Of the
ordinance. The CHRONICLE is law abid |
ing organ. Evidently the Independent is
not. For proof of the last assertion
reao he numerous assaults made in their !
columns on the good citizens. and clergy |
Of our town, because they happened to
differ in opinion with them on the temper
ancc question. Scan the paper closely
from its very BIRTH and any sane man will
come to the conclusion that it is an
avowed ddrocate Of intemperdace. In
closing we again assert, as we have stated
before in our columns. We believe in the
right of our citizens in and through the
Town Authorities to control, and regulate
the sale Of such liquors as are not already
prohibited by statute, ecen though that
control is utter prohibition If demanded
Can our neighbor say so much? and will |
he do SO, and continue to keep an open
saloon in his printingoffice? We would
not be surprised to see him advocate al
most anything while his actions would be
entirely the opposite of his professions.
Is the independent ION the fence" in
this matter? Please enlighten us. We
believe the charge made by the Times in
FAINT, to the effect that the farmers refuse |
to come to Toledo because they can't get
their whiskey here, to be base SANDER |
upon them We do not believe that one
in twenty-five stay away from our town
because of it. Give US competition i'll
the grain trade and our belief will be
proven.