Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1890-07-03
Prohibition VS. License.
No. 6.

l will now add few statements from
liquor dealers to show that as a
temperance measure, to lessen the
evils of the traffic, license, high or low
is failure. From the same letters
that quoted in my last letter take
the following statements. Peter Her
of Omaha Neb. says: High license
has not hurt our business. but on the
contrary has been great benefit -
Metz Bros, Omaha Neb. say:
There are great many difficulties at
first for the brewers and liQuordealers
to get higl, license law in working
order, but after a year or two you will
certainly find it to your advantage over
prohibition" The Brennan Brewing
Co. st. Louis Mo-, says of high license:
AT first it leSsened the consumption
of liquor, but in the last few years we
witnessed constant increase in gen.
eral.'' G. X. Bowman, Woster o., says:
1--WE don't find the demand for liquor
any less than when there was no
license.'' The Nebraska Distilling Co.
Nebraska City, Neb., says: High
license has not hurt our business. 1t
does not lessen the consumption
of liquor OF beer.'' L might add
many more extracts from other
distillers and dealers letters
but it is not necessary. These are
sufficient to show that high license does
not curtail the traffic and therefore can
not reduce the evils therefrom. AS a
temperance measure it is proven, by its
own friends to be a farce and a failure.
Even as source of revenue it is losing
ground and dishon0rable in the
extreme. To license the traffic is sim
ply selling an indulgence to do wrong.
1t would be much better for the class
of people who furnish the saloon rev.
enue 20 pay it direct into the public
treasury without passing it through the
till of the dramseller. They could
thereby save the large amount that is
now wasted for ruinous drinks.
Bro. Stoke says: prohibition ''has
any more than the success of the Union
armies in the rebellion lessened the
crime of secession, or the horrors OF
war" Well now that is pretty good.
The horrors of that war have been
ended for more than TWENTY-FIVE years,
and duriug these twenty-five years not
single secessionist has raised his
head. The crime as an abstract prin-
ciple may be the same in all ages of the
world; but the fact that there have
been no repetitions of it for twenty-five
years is conclusive evidence that the
success of the Union armies was effect
ual. and it is only question: of :time
when prohibition will prove just as
successful. Mr.. Stoke in a former let
ter stated that there were seven govern
ment retail liquor dealer licenses held
by parties in Great Bend. 1 have
before me letter dated, Newton, June
14th, 1890. stating "a. S. Allen is the
only one that has license at present;
Shaw s. Co.'S expired May 4th last" 1
persume the other five alluded to, are
the jointists arrested in Great Bend
some time ago, and they have failed to
renew. Now give us the same ratio
throughout the whole state and it would
just leave 53S licensed dealers in the
state who are actually in business.
The names and addresses of liquor
manufacturers and dealers quoted in
my last letter are there given. If you
question my veracity, consult them and
be convinced. My lack of egotlsm has
prevented me from giving my Gown
ideas on the NATTER and have there
fore endeavored to give plain solid
facts sustained by the history of the
times, and SO far every one of my
statements stand out clear. Not one
has been disproved, and but one or two
have even been challenged.
The whole issue involved is simply a