Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1902-05-15
TAPP PoINTEDLY REVIEWS
TERRELL's PROHIBITION RECORD

To the Editor of The Journal:
As it seems impossible TO ascertain
where Mr. Terrell stands on the whisky
question, and as he claims TO be local
optionist but says with the same breath
that he is willing to sign a state prohibi-
ton bill: perhaps a little information as
to his previous history on the whisky
question may be of interest. He, seems TO
appeal to the legislative journals for his
history on the whisky question. and,
therefore. we have gone to those journals
and examined his record. We refer 10 SEN
ate journal of 1901, pages 76, n and Is when
the senate had under consideration the
passage Of the bill to prohibit the sale Of
whisky within three miles of any public
school or church in Georgia, with the ex-
ception, of course, of incorporated towns
and cities. The object Of this bill being
to protect the country schools and church
es from the molestation and damaging
influence Of the unholy liquor traf1c. The
bill had passed the house and had been
recommended favorably by the COMMITTEES
on temperance in the senate and came on
for its third reading, and on the question
of its passage as a law. Mr.. Terrell was
then a member of the senate and intro
dueed the following amendment: ''Provid-
ed that this act shall not go into effect
until the grand jury of the county In
which the church or school house to be
affected Is located shall have approved
same upon written application Of the au-
thorities of such church or the trustees
of such schools, as may be-" The object
of said amendment, being. OF course, -
kill the virtue and effect Of the law. Be
ii said to the honor of the Georgia senate
that the amendment was lost, and the
vote was then had on the passage of the
bin. Senator Vincent called for the ayes
and nays, which were recorded. There
were 81 votes for the passage of the bill
and against its passage and II became
law. The Hon. Joseph M. Terrell was one
of the voting against the passage OF
the BILL Here we have Mr.. Terrelfs on
cial record in the legislative journals OF
the state voting against the relief Of the
churches and schools of our country dis
tricts from the whisky traffic, In other
words, We have him on record favor1ng
the letting of whisky traffic invade the
territory Of the country churches and
school houses, where the children of the
commonwealth are to be educated and
reared for citizenship. and we Challenges
him to deny his vote on this question.
From any standpoint that you view Mr..
Terrelrs position on the liquor traffic in
this race IT is unstable and inconsistent
If local option is right. why did he not
put it in his platform and advocate IL and
oppose state prohibition? If state prohi-
bition is right. why did he not put it IN
gia7 II the state, as a state. should. be
turned over TO the whisky traffic why did
he not put 1t in his platform and advocate
II in his campaign2 In other words. why
does he straddle these issues.
We notice in yesterdays Journal the
Rev. Mr.. Blaloek. Mr.. Terrells former
pastor, writes polite card as to Mr.. Ter
rell's character; personally. nobody has
attacked Mr.. Terrell's character, but our
contention is that he is not taking any
affirmative stand on these questions. and
politically the whisky interest, the rail-
roads. the political machine and ring
politicians are backing him in this race.
and we think that any fair minded man
is obliged TO concede these facts and the
whisky interest and railroads and ring
politicians do not make any mistake In
the choice of their candidate for they
know that he is not ntagonistic 10 their
interests before they line up with him.
SIDNEY c. TAPP, Chairman.