The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1906-06-08


law and other temperance legislation
now on the statute books of the State
as having decreased drunkenness,
vice and crime, and oppose any
change, alteration or repeal of same.
We favor an extension of these laws
to portions of the State not now en-
braced in their operation, provided
such extension is with the consent of
the people to be effected thereby, be-
lieving that the people of any locality
have the right to determine this ques-
tion for themselves"
The Herald would like very much to
know just what construction the Dem
ocratic nominee for Governor places
upon that plank in his platform. To
our mind it is ambiguous; we would
not know just how to proceed under
it. We are very glad the party has
endorsed the Adams law, as having
decreased drunkenness, vice and
crime" There are some few people
left yet who are not willing to admit
that very patent fact. We are glad,
too, that the party favors IAN extern
sion of this law to portions of the
state not now embraced" but the pro-
viso is the part we do not quite un-
derstand. Provided" says the plank,
"such an extension is with the con-
sent of the people to be effected there
by"
The consent of how many of the
people? A majority, two-thirds or
three-fourths of the people, or must
it be with the unanimous consent of
the people?
And how and when shall that con-
sent be obtained? May it be done by
petition, or must it be done by ballot?
Must any portion of the state not
now embraced" ask separately and
specifically for the law for its own
immediate locality, or will the general
law be so enlarged that other commu-
mites may take advantage of it when
they will? And who are those to be
effected by it?" Take Columbia for
instance. If Columbia wanted to take
advantage of a law which the party
by solemn declaration says has de-
creased drunkenness, vice and crime"
how would they go about it? Would |
they take advantage of some general
law which this plank contemplates,
or would an election be called first to
determine whether or not Columbia |
wanted that law? And if an election
should occur, who would vote? Those
we take who would be effected there
by" And who are they? The people
Of Maury county? Or the people of
Columbia? Or the people of the 9th
civil district? And if for any reason
Or other, injunction suits or such like,
he election could not be held and the
result determined before the legis-
ature adjourned, then there would be
two year wait, would there not?
We may all have our opinions and
i've our own constructions, but the |
lominee might veto any and all of
ur opinions and constructions; hence
We should like to have his own con- |
truction. And we respectfully sug-
est, therefore, that some special {
riend and supporter of Mr.. Patter- Y
on, ask him just how Colubia would {
e expected to proceed to place itself
nder the beneficent influence of .
NV, which, wherever 1t has been
lied. "has reduced drunkenness, vice
nd crime"
II Mr.. Patterson and his friends who
rev and adopted the platform meant
} favor the further extension of the
dams law, why did they not say SO
/ plain English and without any I'M
eeessaFy veFbage? The plain and
nipple way would have been to have
.ricken out the word 'five," where
lie present law extends it to all towns
FIVE thousand, and inserted the
ord ten, twenty, forty, one hundred
or any word they pleased. ( 1
he Adams law is not self operative
pom towns where the people do not
ant It, It has to be voted upon, or
stitioned for, or in some way taken
Vantage of by 'the people effected
lereby," before 1t outlaws any sa-
on anywhere. Why put that proviso
the platform? It is not in the law,
Id the law has worked successfully
Id satisfactorily without It, Why
1t it in the platform?
If one of the residence wards Of
ashville wanted to legislate against
looms in that ward, how would they
about it? BY ballot? And would |
| the people of Nashville be classed
sufficiently effected thereby" as to |
allowed to vote?