The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1906-08-03
SMART POLITICS.

The Board of Mayor and Aldermen
have raised the saloon license in Co
Ilumbia from $3.50 to $1,000 a year.
That sounds well, but there's a trick
lin 1t.
Fwo evils the
AS a choice between
Herald prefers high license to low
license; but the licensed saloon is an
evil, per Sc; lets not let our minds
get away from that.
This raise of the license is clearly
move to placate and make favor
with the public in behalf of the high
licensed saloon. The liquor dealers,
and others who are not opposed to
the saloon, recognize that something
must be done, and with their usual
foresight they have made bold play;
and a good one; and there is no deny
ing that their trump card is a strong
one. They will make friends by it;
they will make votes by it. That
class of citizens whose every standard
of morals is measured by revenue
stick, will take to this high license
proposition as duck does to water
But that is not the question to be
considered first. Lets proceed in or
der, and take up and discuss and set
tie great questions as they come be-
fore us. The first question to be con-
sidered is the extension of the Adams
law. That has nothing to do with high
license or low license; that does not
settle or even consider the question
of whether there shall or shall not be
saloons in Columbia. All that the ex-
tension of the Adams law to Column
bia means to Columbia is to give the
people of Columbia the right to say
for themselves whether or not whis-
key shall be legally sold in Columbia.
And we want to hear any man give
any reasonable, sound and just reason
why the people of this town are not
as much entitled to local self govern
ment as the people of Pulaski or
Franklin or Mt. Pleasant, or the peo-
pie of any other community.
The people of Pulaski and Mt. Pleas
ant are all living under the Adams /
aw. And yet in Pulaski it is not law |
'ul to sell whiskey, while in Mt S
Pleasant it is lawful. The difference {
S that in Pulaski they have voted the {
saloon out, while in Mt. Pleasant they t
lave not. Whenever the people of q
VT. Pleasant, or a majority Of them. '
want to get rid of the open saloon, t
hey may, under the law, do so; I'M c
il they want to they do not have to. S
And we claim for Columbia that same T
light. a
Is that not fair and just and right? Y
f a majority of Columbia want the v
aloon, let them have it. If a major v
ty do not want it, it ought not to a
e Is that not sound Democracy? Il
S that not local selfgovernment? Is
hat not majority rule? Is there a
nan in Columbia who will raise his e
dice and say that local self-govern- o.
lent and majority rule should apply Il
, everything else except the liquor W
'afic? That special exemption and 81
pecial exception should be made of IL
nd for the saloon keeper? W
Give us the extension of the Adams d;
wv first, and when it comes to ap- bl
lying the law to Columbia, then will az
e the time to discuss high license m
nd low license or no license, and the Ell
eneral effect of the liquor traffic T.
pom business and morals and the 70
)cial and religious life of commu- ia
ty -
Lets not get the cart before the oC
0rse. The duty before us right now si
to select men for the legislature If
no will vote and work and use ev- re
y honorable means to extend the nc
dams law to Columbia. After that VIC
done, then take up the questions We
license Or no license, saloon or no to
loon sh
The whiskey men have made their SUI