Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1890-05-22
High License and Prosperity.

er.
High License and Prosperity.
In this, our third letter upon the
question of whether..or not prohibition
is the best method of controlling the
evils of excessive drinking, we propose
to show that high license law can
and does better control the evils of
drink than does any other legal method
known to man. Our worthy opponent,
Mr.. Miller, has given our readers
rehash of the arguments of the New
York Voice, paper published in the
exclusive interest of the third party
prohibitionists-for revenue only-and
ore whose every statement is exager-
ated and overdrawn to make them
more telling with the one-idea men who
see no good in any man who does not
take up with their fanatical idea of
prohibition. Our readers, knowing
the Voice to be the most rabid of the
prohibition extremist organs, will make
due allowance for it's statements, and
only give it credit for being a strong
third-party organ; nothing more.
How much money do you think
Kansas has spent for government
liquor license, or taxes, for the first
three-fourths of the present revenue
year? Here are the figures, from the
fnv3o h0
first tbree-fourths of the present year
there were 1887 government retail
liquor license obtained in Kansas,
which costs the men procuring them
$25. 90 or a total of $34 ,675. 90; and those
license were not obtained for fun, but
for the purpose of selling liquor in
Kansas, to Kansas men. OF these 1887
Kansas liquor dealers not one of them
has bought gallon of liquor manufac-
tured in the state; but every dollar
that has been spent for liquor to sell to
their people has gone to neighboring
states-out of Kansas. We do not
know what profit these Kansas liquor
dealers make on their business, or how
much they have to sell to make back
their nearly $50, 600 paid for govern
ment license, besides other expenses
of business; but we believe and any
reasonable man will admit, that they
would have to invest hundreds of
thousands of dOllers year in liquors
manufactured out side of the state in
order to make their business profitable.
OF all the vast sums thus spent none
comes back to Kansas. It is con-
tinual outpouring of our hard earned
money, and none of it returning. 1t
a constant drain upon our resources
to enrich our neighbor states.
How would it be had we a high
license law? If each of these 1857
Kansas liquor dealers were compelled
to pay into the treasures of their
towns and cities license tax of, say
a low amount, $500, they would pay
revenue into the state amounting to
$693 10000 annually. But there would
not be that number of dealers, even
with an averge license of $500 year
land the average had ought to be
double that. Do you suppose that
Great Bend, which has had SEVEN
government retail liquor licenses within
the last three-fourths of a year, would
have seven saloons paying license of
81 900 year each?s Do you not know
that instead of seven we would have
but one Or two dealers in intoxicants;
and the city would be Il gamer by one
or two thousand dollars year.
Under the present law the present
joint keeper has but few restrictions.
He sells to whom he pIeases; young or
old; sober or inebriated. He Of course
takes the risk of being prosecuted,
fined and Imprisoned, but he buys
cheaper stuff, containing more life
destroying qualities, and sells it at a
higher price in order that he may be
and buck the law. There is no
boys just learning the prohibited habit;
no protection to the family of the
drunkard who has lost all self control.
The joint keeper pays his fines with
the money he has got from his
customers, the law is vindicated, and
he again proceeds to disobey and lay
up more money against another prose-
cution. With a strict, high license law
we would not only have fewer liquor
dealers, but we would know where to
lay our hands upon them. We would
know who was selling to children and
habitual drunkards. A law that would
make the liquor dealer kept his doors
open to the public; would compel him
to give heavy bonds as Il guarantee
that he would not sell to habitual
drunkards or to minors, making a
heavy penalty for SO doing, would
afford the injured ones the family of
the inebriate, the parents of the minor,
some protection; when as it now is
they have none.
CONTINUED June 81