Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1902-05-29

SAYS eUERRY is CANDIDATE
OF PROHIBITION ASSOCIATION

To the Editor of The Journal:
In The Journal of the 18th Mr.. McCord
writes another card in which he says that
~ admit that he quoted Mr.. Query cor
rectly when he said he was a proposed
candidate" Now this is an error, as I
made no such admission. Mr.. McCord
said he was a self-proposed pronIeiu=a
candidate. The contention I made was
that he was not self proposed candidate
There you see that Mr.. McCord is in error
in his quotation.
The trouble about Mr. McCord is that
he is not sufficiently posted to give the
facts. Now to show right here (and also
further on) that this is true he says: "A
great many persons also wrote to Hon
Henry G. Turner. Hon. Pope Brown. Hon.
Fleming G.. du Bignon, and Hon. James
NJ. Smith and proposed to them that each
should become a candidate for governor.
but none of those gentlemen considered
himself sufficiently proposed to respond
to the call Of the Sentinel and answer
its demand to tell how they stood on the
state prohibition question" When neither
one of the distinguished gentlemen were
written to at all. as they had all declined
to run before our letters asking the three
candidates the question as to their stand
ing on state prohibition. He further
says: "Col. p. confirms my statement that
the Georgia Prohibition association did
not propose or indorse Mr.. Guerry's can
didacy." I wish to say Mr.. McCord Is IN
error again, and again misleading. did
not say so. What l did say was that the
Georgia Prohibition association did not
meet and propose 10 nominate him. and
then stated that 'this association has
never been in the habit of meeting by del
egates and making nominations OF on
GERS. The association prefers to work in
side the democratic lines and there re-
dress its grievances" So that Mr.. Nc
Cord was not absolutely correct and was
misleading in the above quotation. Mr.
McCord is again misleading when he says
that Mr.. Query is not the candidate OF
the Georgia Prohibition association. and
that he has the authority of its president
that he is not"
Mr.. Guerry is the candidate of the menu
bers OF the Georgia Prohibition associa-
ton, although there was no meeting by
delegates to nominate him, and they VIII
support him in the democratic primary
just as Mr.. Terrell and Mr.. EstiIl are can
didates of the democratic party and will
be supported at its coming primary.
Mr.. Query is accepted as the candidate
of prohibition Democrats all over the
state.
I want Mr.. McCord to know that Mr.
Query has not been nominated by the
prohibitionists nor viii he be. He is not
seeking nomination except at the bands
OF the Democratic party, and from that
party he cannot be ruled out. Again, Mr..
McCord does not seem to make any dis
tinction between the executive committee
of the Georgia Prohibition association and
the association itself. The officers and
members OF the executive committee con-
sists OF only IS or 20 members. and the as
ISOLATION consists OF between 100000 and
200 900. This, no doubt. viii be news to
Mr.. McCord. The Democratic party also
consists OF probably a like number but
some are prohibitionists and some are
anti-prohibition Democrats, and It has an
executive committee, but 1t generally sets
the day to nominate all Democrats for
statehouse offices, and the prohibition
Democrats win also nominate on that
day. There are other candidates also rum
ming for the same nomination on that day,
but only one OF these Democratic candi-
dates says he viii help to nominate sena-
tors and representatives who are favor
able to the abolition of bar rooms-oniy
one says he is in favor of state prohibi-
ton, at least to the abolition OF bar
rooms by direct legislation: only one who
says 1T am a prohibitionist and not dis
pensaryist," only one who says II believe
prohibition is right and the dlspensary is
wrong"
Mr.. McCord says: Now. why all this
row about prohibition" 1 would like to
know If Mr.. McCord is not helping to
make it. Mr.. McCord further says: The
attempt has been made to show that Mr..
Terrell is not a prohibitionist." VIII Mr..
Terrell say he is in favor Of state prohi-
bition at least TO the extent of the aboli-
ton of barrooms in the state?" Mr.. Nc
Cord says further: I'VE are all prohibi-
tionists.'
Ny! my! who pray are we. want to
be delivered from all such prohibition. He
says further: mo man with heart In
him could be anything else but prohibi-
ZIONIST" That is as true as gospel He
liz q
his neighbors as himself and vote the anti
prohibitionist ticket" to which / say,
amen.
THAT last sentence sounds like preach
er's writing.
If Mr.. McCord is on Mr.. Terrelrs side
of the liquor question and Mr.. Terrell Is
on the liquor dealers side. then say,
good Lord deliver the prohibitionists from
such prohibition.
Mr.. Terrell has already confessed that
he will not assist in electing members OF
the senate and house who are favorable 70
prohibition. and also has said that he Is
opposed to state prohibition. Therefore
Mr. McCord and the liquor dealers ana
their associates are supporting him. many
others really not knowing his real afti-
tude on the question are doing the same.
Again deliver me from such prohibition.
Now TO show further what I have al-
ready said is true about HIS not being post
ed. Mr.. Mccord says: How has It (pro-
hibition) been obtained In the III counties
that are now dry? BY radical views and
radical measures such as Mr.. Query
would adopt? No. But by each county
working out its own salvation and by
vote of the people getting what they
wanted" Now this is one of Mr.. TerreIfs
mistakes and suppose Mr.. McCord takes
il for granted that it is true. Again In
error and again misleading. In the first
place there are not III counties absolutely
dry In the second place the counties
that are dry are not all dry by the gener-
al local option law. as Mr.. Terrell claims.
nor "by each county working out its own
salvation and by vote of the people get
ting what they wanted" as Mr.. McCord
claims. but for the information of Mr..
McCord and others interested, I will give
the manner in which liquor has been put
out and voted out of 100 counties as ii now
stands: 20 counties are dry by direct ac-
ton of the legislature; by the refusal OF
the ordinary to grant license (praise TO
the ordinaries); IL by high license; BY
the three mile law as special local option
laws were passed, and liquor was voted
out of: IS of these counties by that meth
cd, and only 81 are now dry by the gener-
al local option law. And there are wet
counties and dispensaries amounting 70
8 making in all 1S7 counties, and 100 coun-
ties are dry by one of these methods. and
not over 100 counties have adopted its