The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1885-10-22
rRUE rEMPERAKCE

ana really glad to welcome bro.
NeWcomb'' to the prohibitions army.
"Behold how good and how pleasant 1t
Is fog brethren TO dwell together in
unity.n For the sske Of unity We I'D.
nit that s'true" adds something, some
times. lam willing TO accept temper
ance for the present and risk its being
'stFue." object TO the use OF the word
true a. catch for the unWaFy, is all.
Our brother claims TO be e teetosaleF and
truly temperate man. He has no use
for men who profess 20 be temperance
adyocates-and drink in the dark
neither have I-thsy are . disgrace 70
the cause. They are "whtted sep
ulchers."
Let as try and See how near We can
come together.
I believe both are willing 70 admit
1. That intemperance- is bad thing.
2. That whisky selling ought to be
stopped.
8. That many drug stores are no better
than licensed saloons-even worse, as
they profsas to be something that they
are not.
4 That high license will not prevent
whiskey selling and drunkenness.
5. That the prohlbitory law has not
been enforced as well as 1t should have
been.
8. That laws prohibiting crime and
prescribing punishment are in harmony
with Gods truth and the eternal fitness
of things.
Z. That prohibitory laws are factors
in morals as well as the principles they
set forth.
8. That nearly all laws are prohibi-
tory in nature. for the protection of the
innocent and punishment of the guilty.
9. That the prohibitory liquor law Is
intended to be preventive and pro-
tecdVe.
We shall add no more on the agree
ment side at present, and see If we can
find some things yet In doubt, and final
ly some concerning which we differ. Il
seems TO me that there are but three
states of mind concerning any prohlbi.
ton presented for acceptance. We eth
ar believe, dIsbelieve. or are In doubt. l
believe the prohibitory law is right: he
either disbelieves or is in doubt Until
further information, we shall put him
down as q disbeliever, although he
kindly calls me Brother LotZ."
would ask, then, what principle of
justice is violated by prohibitory liquor
law? Does it violate the right of the sa-
loon keeper any more than the laws
against stealing vIolste the right of the
horse thief?
i He may say yes, as 1t prevents q man
from going into = businesssthst the peo-
pie are willing TO patronize, while
they are not willing to patronize
horse stealing. To this We reply THAT
each Is for gam, and no adequate re
turn. The liquor sold adds nothing to
the mans strength, or the necessities OF
life either of himself or family, hut on
the contrary, It INJURIES him morally,
physically and financially. 1t is prob
ably on 8 slow but sure plan. 1t is
robbery by making use of mans weak
ness. 1t is deception. II robs a man OF
health, influence, money and brains, and
gives him sickness, obscurity, poverty
and imbecllity IN return, and yet blind
ing the man so that he is unable to see
his true condition.
Shall we license men to do thisr ]
say never. he says they are doing II
anyway. If we grant that they are, we
are not parties to the crime. If we can
save one man and his family by means
of prohibition, 1t Is worth advocacy.
If 1t were his boy, would he not say
yes? if his neIghbor's, is not his boy
as dear to him as yours is to
you ? Shall I go TO sleep with
vipers In my yard to bite my family,
Not I; neither would he. Shall I dc
LEES if they are in my neighbours yard
Does he say :''Your saying no, and doing
your best to prevent it will leave some
of them still Lying" Granted. But we
will drive them into the grass SO that ot1I
, children can pass through the path and
go to school. So of the saloons. We
can drive them into back rooms and be-
hind drug cases, where those who are
determined to be bitten can find them
and save those who have no desire. But
he Gays: ave can make them pay The
: expense of the city" VIII they not max.
more than they pays Is it right to legal
, ize crimef SHALL We go into partner.
ship with crlminalss
He says also that mistakes have been
made by our lawmakers; that they leg
islated in favor of the drug stores RnC
1 probate judges, and that the judges max
money out of the business. There SEEM
to be some reason for tht
statement. It has been stated that ever
our upright Judge has been rather liber
al in their behalf bee ause of the moDe'
init raise my voice in favor OF al
investigation of the status of Ithe whIsk!
interest of Emporia. let it hurt whom
may. Yours "Fraternally,"
;, r. L. LoTz.