The Brookhaven leader. [volume] (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1883-1891, 1885-11-26
The JOINT Discussion.
.d;,or R,ookbaven Leader:

and Mr.. Hosklns 10 discuss the pro
hibition question publicly and regrets
that circumstances prevented his at
tendance at the debates already had.
Mr.. Hoskins is not self-constitu-
ted champion of liquor. He has
his following and his backing. Now
if the advocates OF liquor are honest
with themselves, and if their side of
the discussion is carried on as all
discussions should be, with q view
of eliminating truth, very great
good will be accomplished. Will
those who now favor liquor selling,
and who have constituted Mr.. Hos
kins their champion in these dis
cussions, be honest with themselves
There's the question. i am quite
sure, as a Prohibitionist, that if ]
was convinced that | would be i'm
proved either morally or physically
by liquor drinking, would at once
cease to oppose liquor selling.
Further, il | was satisfied that the
community, or even a respectable
minority of it, would be benefited
in any way by liquor drinking ]
would from thence sign my name to
petitions for license to retail, and /
am quite sure ninety one-hun-
dreths of Prohibtionists would do
the same thing.
Liquor selling is either q good
thing or an evil thing. 1t must fall
on one side OF the line or the other :
the good or the BAD preponderatcs.
Fit is a good thing it ought not
to be 80 heavily taxed, and no H.
ccnse ought to be required to sell it
but it should be free and be sold
as bacon and corn or calico is sold.
Fit is an evil thing we ought not
to have any OF it.
The present license system pro-
ceeds on the idea that it IS an evil
thing and requires restraining. For
the life of me | can't see how any
man can favor the license system.
1t is idle to say that prohibition
don't prohibit.
| Whisky ought to be sold freely
or its sale ought TO be prohibited.
fprohibition violates any principles
the license system violates the same
principle. If any personal liberty
is taken from the 5000 citizens OF
the county by prohibition, the same
personal liberty is taken from Is,
995 of those citizens by the present
license system-since only five men
in this county arc now privileged
to sell These five are moneycd
men, and without money no man
can sell under present laws-and
this we find on our statute books
a privilege only for the rich and q
discrimination against the poor.
This is contrary TO our theory of
government.
No cOlored man or woman in
Lincoln county has any liberty" to
sell whisky, and there is no
member Of the negro race in the
county who can, under present laws,
get a license. If there is, trot him
out.
But this is aside from what l in
tended to say. To return to your
discussions with Mr.. Hoskins !:
Assuming that the whisky people
are not so joined to their idols that
they are beyond reason, how would
it do to initiate the courts and let
your audiences hear testimony peril
nent to the question in dispute. You
can easily produce witnesses, even
from the signers TO the liquor petit
tions now being published, who will
say that they have never been bene-
fitted morally or physically by IL
quor, and who would be willing 10
ray largely to be relieved from its
evil consequences-who, in fact,
would give all their worldly posses,
sions to be rid of the unnatural ap,
petite which controls them. This
being done, let Mr.. Hoskins produce
witnesses who can or will say that
whisky drinking, as carried on in
the saloons, is q moral or physical
benefit to the drinkers, or to their
families and friends. Let the wit.
nesses on each side state the fac,
and let the question he honestly de-
cided BY each nearer. Or should
such proceeding be impracticable,
can't you in some way induce each
nearer to act honestly on his own
experience and obser, alton. If your
audiences will so act your discus
sion will bring about good; other
| uien II will ha uso1oes