Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1886-03-27

1 =
learned, marked and inwardly digest
ed your entire article. but this quota
tation we found too much for us; we
could not masticate it; the more we
chewed the bigger it grew; hence,
could not swallow it. We send it back
| to you with the polite request that yon
swallow it yourself.
You certainly did not weigh the i'm.
port of the words "brave' and "man-
ly." Such language was an unexpect
ed thrust at the intelligence of 1.-The
yOOd people of Wellington" and a
| character which they have maintained
as IA distinguished characteristic tor
generations past. We did not think
| that in your review OF our effort to get
rid OF Il blasting curse, that YOU would
char rLcrcrize the effort of those engaged
as mHnaniy, ignOble and cO0ardly.
This, by Implication, is the plain
English of the whole matter. There
are no people, anywhere, who would
scorn more readily to employ methods
Of questionable prOpriety to accomplish
an object than those you have held up
in such an unenviable light. To put
the ''burden of evangelizing a town
upon the shoulders of u county court"
did not occur to us. We knew that
they could not do this by simply with
holding their signatures to Il dram shop
license. The Specification of the term
'evangelize," according to Mr.. Web
ster, is "To preach the gospel to, and
convert to belief of the gospel"
When our county court enters solemn
ly upon the work OF evangelizing we
will remove the prefix '.judge' and
substitute another. You use the term
''moralize" in the same connection, and,
we think, more correctly. But, if by
refusing to sign dram shop license,
a county court Can mOrdlize cOmmu
nifty, is it not their bounden duty so to
do, rather than such license and de-
moralize it? seeing that they are in
some measure the custodians of order
as well as laW.
You say "the remOnstrants aver that
their signers are better people, ETC.,
but where i'm the constitution or the
laws do they find any warrant for the
idea that as citizen petitiOning to a
court, one man is better than another?"
You doubtless thought this was poser !;
let us see. Taking it in its legal phase
| you are 10 doubt correct; but in its
application to the case under review.
your point, we think lis not well taken.
| for this reason: That a remonstrance
against the issuance OF dram shop
license is not a legal paper-there is no
provision made for it by law. Why
submit it then? We answer: Because
we believe there is point in the juris-
diction of county court where the
law stops; then remOnstrance can be
entertained. If we are correctly in-
formed the laws reads. in substance,
that where there is two-third MAORI
ty of tax paying citizens petitioning for
a dram shop license that the court shall
issue the license; but where there is
simply majority the court may grant
1t. Here the law stops and leaves the
whole matter TO the discretion of the
cOnrt-they are thrown upon their own
responsibility without the restraints
and trammels of legal provisions. This
is shown by the action of Judge
Barnett, who dissented from the ruling
of the court. Had the word "may" in
the statutes been supplanted by the
term "shaU,' Judge Barnett would
have had no alternative but to waive
private convictions and bow to the
supremacy OF law.
Now, as the petition from Yelling.
ton lacked the requisite two third ma
jOrity, many of our best citizens ap-
peared before the court and entered
their plea, because they knew that the
case was divested of the "whereases'
and ''atoresaids" of law, and thereby
became optional with the court.
Now, as remOnstrances or remon-
strants against dramshop licenses are
unauthorized by law, it becomes a
question of morality in the case of
bare majority, and here one citizen is
better than anOther-moral men are
better than immoral Your position
while it is correct in its application to-
law, loses its application where the law
has no jurisdiction. If the petitioners
for dram shops had reached the re-
quisite two thirds majority no man of
average sense would have weighed his
morality against the most abandoned,
seeing that in the ineXorable demands
of the law it would be but as "the
small dust of the balance"
You tell us to educate the negro,
elevate their standard of right" How
kind you were, MIR. Editor, to voluD-
teer such salutary advice. You bring
us under lasting obligations to you,
but the advice came little too late;
we anticipated you many months You
would have us believe that hitherto
we had been very derelict in this
especial line OF duty. You have saloons
i'll your own town. Do you want
them! No, for yOu have avowed your
self a temperance man and wish the
evils "reduced to a minimum" Are
go" educating the negro? How many
converts have you made? We pause
for reply. We recognize in the press
most potent factor i'll the educating
OF the masses, either for good or evil.
If yOu have done much evangelizing,
if yon have been elevating the moral
sentiment of the people with regard to
the drink traffic You must have done it
privately, for if there has been any
thing in your paper since you were
seated upon the editorial tripod to
warrant any such conclusion ''the
9ood people of Wellington have failed
TO discover 1t. We have nothing against
the lntelligencer as political paper; it
Is one of the best in the state, and is
always welcome guest at our fire.
sides: but, we have somewhat against
1t because of its failure to help reduce
the evils of lntemperamce to a mini |
mum. You tell us to teach. preach,
educate; we are doing it to the best of
our ability. But to inculcate the prin-
cIples OF morality with the agencies of
immortality in our midst is no easy task.
we may make the schools and churches |
vocal with the evils of intemperance.
We may hang upon its walls .'SewelPs |
Stomach CHART and many others,
showing the destructive power and |
poison of alcoholic stimulants: and all |
will be of bur little avail, if with the !
appetite the liquor is easily accessible |
to satisfy it. \ glass of whisky or a |
mug OF beer Is stronger logic as rule
with drinking man than a logical
ON the evil, stomach plates
or heightened array OF facts. Be-
llevin9 this to be true we wanted the
court to give us respite of six months
in order to do our eyangelizing more
effectively, but they (Judge Barnett
dissenting, and We thank him for iD
thought it best to fasten the iliquitr
upon us another year, that we might
20 up under much tribulatlon. We
Will be prepared in the future with re-
gard to This court TO eXclaim witt.
the old darkey, "Elessed am he that
expecteta nuthin' for, verify he shall
not he disappointed" In conclusion,
NJ II