The Sedalia weekly bazoo. [volume] (Sedalia, Mo.) 187?-1904, 1882-12-19
MANY MEN
Prove to be Of Many Minds
on Prohibition.
Some Interesting Interviews On
the all Absorbing
Topic.

VIC 0AA 6OSOA OAO8
Topic.
That the question of the submission OF
an amendment te the constitution, prohib-
iting the manufacture aud sale of alcohol
ic Liquors as . beverage, in this state, is
the most prominent and important one
now before the people for settlement, none
will deny. That it is the battlefield on
which hot fight is to be made, at Jeffer-
son City, during the session G: the next
legislature, is also conceded.
The forces on both sides are being mar
shsled, and the t0csin of war hae long
since been sounded.
Yesterday, . BAzoo reporter started out
on an interviewing tour, to 6nd out from
representative men in the professions and
ceilings, and trades, just what they thought
about this question. and such are laid be-
fore the readers of the paper Published for
the people now on earth, this morning.
REV DIR. H. O JACKSON,
pastor of the Ohio street NJ E. church, y as
first called on. To the reporters inquiry
rs to his views on the subject, he said:
II am in favor of = constitutional
amendment, prohibiting the liquor traffic
because believe that To be the most ef-
fectual way OF suppressing intemperance,
which is the greatest curse of our land
IL am opposed to the license system al
together To license an evil is t. legalize
ii; thus making the state not only author
lie, but protect, a manifest wrong.
Besides, no license tax. however high,
will stop the evil, nor materially lessen the
sale of liquor in the state. We are told
that prohibition does not prohibit be-
cause men will evsde the law the same
argument may be used against high Ii
cense men will evade that law, also
."The revenue derived from license of
which We hear 50 much is delusion.
the liquor dealers are going to put that
amount out Of their own pockets; their
customers will have to pay il in the in
creased price Of drinks. This increased
price will not cause any one to quit drink
ing, for when the appetite is nee acquired
q man will drink, no matter what it costs
he will spend less money for bread in
order to meet the extra charge for drinks.
A high license is simply tax imposed on
the wives and children of inebriaIes, which
they must pay at the expense OF their own
food and clothing.
Suppose that a sufficient revenue would
be derived in this way to run the state
government; who wants to be relieved OF
taxation By such a method? 1t is not fair
to make the liquor drinkers pay the en-
tire expense of the state government. But
that is just what q high license proposes
10 do.
'The issue before us, now, however, is
ment to the puolic. Certainly the people
ought TO be permitted to express their will
at the ballot box. on aquestiOn of such
vital importance as this.
IL don't know whether it will carry, if
submitted at the next general election or
not, but / do know that defeat will noi
bury the question forever, as some seem to
think. This question is like Bsnquo's
ghost, it will not down nj anybOdy's bid
ding The discussion and agitation that
will result from its submission to the PEG
pie will greatly strengthen the cause of
prohibition, so that, even if defeated at
first, it will. in the end. be victorious.
"In common fairness, the question ought
to he submitted apart from all party issues,
for it is not, in this state, a party ques-
tion."
J. III. boutwell,.
81 hardly knew how to express myself on
this question. ] believe that i: nine
tenths of the people were in favor of pro-
hisition, il could be enforced; but no,
otherwise. As TO the submission OF the
amendment, l am not in favor of il, for il:
will only be an expense for nothing.
That is, l do not favor it unless the major
ity OF tina people want il, am that cont
know. One thing is sure, this prohibition
movement will kill any party that takes
il up"
LOGICAL STATEMENT.
The reporter called upon Rev A. W..
Nesbif, the scholarly pastor of the Old
School Presbyterian church, at his study.
Mr.. Nesbit gave the following logical
sratemen, of his views on the subject:
prohibition from my standpoint is
l. A matter of expeiiency. That is to
saw, it is not matter of obligation per Sc
II may be brought to the point OF being
obligatory, but it has to be brought there
it is hot there to begin with. / take a
strong stand in favor OF the privilege of
every man to use wine that W shes to. The
denial Of this privilege, in my estimation,
involves our Lord, and has done great in
jury TO the cause.
9. 1t is matter Of right. Instead Of the
question, in this case, being the right of
the individual and the privilege of the
state. it is the privilege OF the individual
and the right Of the state. All this out
cry tina, men make about personal right"
is really an outcry about personal privi
lege." Tire right" is on the side of the
state. Moreover, II is a fundamental
right. II man can't defend himself his
liie-what can he do? And if a state can
not prevent its own dissolution what can it
do? Moreover. il there be any con-
flict of rights at al, which ought To suffer
those of the state or those Of the individual
II any portion of this people rises up and
| l. 4. a. - 81 sks,