The Sedalia weekly bazoo. [volume] (Sedalia, Mo.) 187?-1904, 1886-10-05
Reply of Capt. l.. l.. Bridges.
SEpALIA, Mo-, SEPT. l4TH, 1885,

SlF Ih0S. Z. Merton, SECRETARY OF IefftS county
Prohibition CoHreatioR.
Sir-I am 10 receipt of the following
questions sent me by you at the direction
of your convention and requesting that
answer the same.
First-If elected to the legislature, will
you favor, Use your influence and vote for
the submission to the people of an amend
ment to the constitution prohibiting the
manufacture and sac of intoxicating
liquors to be used as a beverage?
Second Will you favor and vote for
the immediate passage OF a local option
! law?
Third Will YOU oppose and vote
ag ,inst the repeal or change of the John
son gambling law?
And that said correspondence be pub
lished.
In answer to this communication, will
saw that believe it to be the duty of one
who accepts a nomination to a legislative
Office to clearly define his position on any
aud all questions likely to be the subject
of legislation during his term OF Office and
that it is also the right of his constituents
to require him to do so.
therefore cheerfully submit the fol-
lowing answers to your questions together
with my reasons for so answering.
First tn n, If elected to the legislature, /
will favor, use my influence and vote for the
submission Of an amendment to the state
constitution, prohibiting the manufacture,
&C., of intoxicating liquor.
In answering these questions affirma
lively, W, uld not be treating you fairly
nor doing myself justice il | did not say
to you frankly that | have little faith in
prohibition. In other words | seriously
doubt the wisdom or efficacy OF a prohibit
tory law. and do not deem il necessary
here TO give my reasons for such doubt,
suffice to say that | believe tn here ar
other means for reaching the evils you
seek TO remedy, better than prohibitory
legislation. The question of submission
is, in my judg lent, another and very diff
| ferent question than that of prohibition.
Ii is simply this: Are you In favor OF
allowing the electors of this state to exer-
else their right of suffrage on the question
of prohibition, or will you deny them this
privilege because in your opinion prohibit
ton is unwise.
/ cannot say that / or those who think
as do embody all the wisdom of the state,
snd even though were sure that my
views on this, or any other question, were
the only correct ones, hardly think /
would be justified in compelling every
body TO adopt them, nor in denying to
others who may differ from me, the rigat
| 10 exercise and vote their own opinions,
however at variance with mine.
For this reason / shall vote for submis-
sion, and If the amendment is submitted to
vote of the people, and is by them adopt
ed, / shall cheerfully submit, and endeavor
to uphold the law, consoling myself with
the knowledge that am carrying out that
good Democratic doctrine that il is my
solemn duty to submit and bow to the will
of the majority.
Second-Will you favor and vote for a
local option law"
can also answer this question in the
affirmative.
believe that those who oppose submits
sion, are in favor of local option law, but
l cuniess my inability to distinguish any
difference in principle between the two.
The local option law gives a county,
township or incorporated city, the right to
prohibit the sale of intoxicating LIQUOR
while submission is extending the same
right throughout the state, and If it is not
undemocratic to prohibit the sale or manu-
facture flor to prohibit the sale is prOtGnto
to prohibit the MANUFACTURED of liquor in
Pettis comfy, l cannot see why it should
be to prohibit il throughout the state, and
yet the leading men of the dominant party
this state oppose submission and favor
local option. This seems to me to be dis
tinction without difference.
The law now on our statute books Is
based on the principle of cal option. Ii
requires petition from a majority of
tax-psying citizens of the block or townshi p
before liquor can be sold therein in less
quantities than gallon. will say that I
certainly..shall not favor any change in the
johnson law, unless il be to ex-
tend Its provisions TO stock and produce
gambling, for it is impossible to see where
In the latter is not the most vicious and
ruinous of the two, because its evil Effects
are not confined To those who indulge in the
practice and those Immediately connected
with and dependent upon them, but reach
out and effect the farmers and producing
classes, largely controlling the price OF
commodities that the margin dealers"
have no hand in producing.
/ believe that 1 have now answered all
your questions and in doing so / am
conscious that have jeopardized
II not Destroyed any chance that may
have had of sn election, for those of my
friends who are opposed to nrohibitIon will
be irclined to vote against me because 1
am In favor Of submission, while many Of
your party will oppose me because / am
not in favor of prohibition.
While shall be glad even proud, of
t e support Of yourself and the friends of
ihr cause Won Ienresenf | am not omit