Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1890-06-05
High License and No Joints.

High License and No Joints.
In this, our fourth letter, we desire
to say few more words in favor of
a high license law, as the best means
of controlling the evils resulting from
excessive liquor drinking. That the
liquor traffic needs some regulation no
one will at all question:; but that any
single state, or any small number of
states in this great Union should say
they will crush it out of existence is the
utmost folly. Why not look upon the
sensible side of the question, and while
we know that it is an utter impossibility
to do away with it entirely, why not
handle it in such manner that we
can keep it under control, and know
where it is and what it is doing. What
is gained by arraying our state against
those who use liquor but do not abuse
the use of it, with the same arguments
that the laws are arrayed against those
why drink to excess. Would it be
right to say that no one in our state
should own or carry any sort of gun,
pistol or revolver, regardless of sur
roundings. inclination, character or the
uses to which such weapons were to be
put, just because few brutal men con-
vert them into instruments of murder
or pillage? When you say by law that
no man shall be the judge of what he
wants to eat or drink, that law partakes
of ali the elements Of the laws of king
governed countries which prohibit the
peasantry from carrying or owning
guns or fowling pieces, and true Ameri-
cans do not brook such denial of their
free born rights. Hence intoxicants
will be bought and sold in any state,
and if it is intended that the law
should have supervision over the tarffic,
strict high license law, with local OPP
ton for such localities or communities
where the majority of the people desire
it, is the only just and reasonable way
to deal with it.
In his letter No. 4 our friend Mr.
Miller refers to letters in his second
bible-the New York Voice, concern.
ing 1.-The success of prohibition in
Iowa." Prohibition in Iowa never
was success, and the most emphatic
prof to the support of this assertion is
the result of the recent elections in
that state, when the people said
with no uncertain voice, Away
with it, we want no more of
it, just as they will say in Kansas as
soon as we have state officers who
comply with the demands of the people
and give us a chance to vote upon it,
Kansas men don't want New York
Voaces, nor New York grain gamblers,
nor New York trusts and bOndholders.
nor New York gold bugs, to tell US
what we want or what is good for US.
If our opponent has no other voice
than the New York Voice to help him
out with manufactured statistics and
highly cOlored flights of prohibition
glories and saloon horrors, he had best
have stayed out of this argument. We
had thought our friend would dish US
up something new and original-some-
thing fresh and worth reading. But it
seems he is welded to the New York
Voice and knows no other argument.
Brother Miller says he ''does not
object to legitimate criticism of his
'rehash OF arguments" etc; and thinks
we have 'low estimate of the intel
ligence" of our readers. We certainly
have high estimate of the intelligence
of the readers of the DEMOCRAT, for
we know them to be the best and most
liberal minded people in the world. If
we thought otherwise we might fear
that your extracts from that most
ultra of all ultra prohibition organs,
the Voice. might mislead some of them.
That paper never sends out an issue
but is full OF statements colored to
suit the purpose it is published for, i. e.,
the dollars of the prohibition cranks,
and to give space and time to an
expose of its false positions and
unreasonable arguments would be but
boring our readers unnecessarily.
Your only authority appears to be that
paper, and as it is no authority with
the great mass of our readers, It is not
deserving Of any future attention,