The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1908-10-15
NO VOTE
On Rose County Option
in This County Until
Spring
VETS HAVE NO FEARS

William v. Marsh. superintendent
of the Canton district of the Ohio
Anti-Saloon League, yesterday denied
the rumor that an effort would be
made to vote Stark county dry" un-
der the new Rose law Immediately
after the presidential election. In re-
pudiating the statement to that eff
feet he said: "The Anti-Saloon
League does not take the initiative
in any county unless there is local
sentiment sufficient to warrant such
an action. We do not want to pre-
cipitate a campaign in any county un-
less the people themselves want it.
You can depend on it. that unless the
people want local option in Stark
county, we will make no efforts along
that line until the spring of next
year"
The report. which Mr.. Marsh denied,
drifted out in dispatch from Colum-
bus, the state headquarters of the
Anti-Saloon League, and was to the
effect that the antis, encouraged by
the past successes, would Immediately
after the fall election. inaugurate
campaigns in Lucas, Franklin, Stark
and Montgomery counties, for the ex-
clusion of the saloons. These four
counties are numbered among the six
counties of the state where the liquor
interests are strongest
The liquor side of the question was
also interviewed upon the Stark coun-
ty situation. Apparently they feel no
apprehension about the county going
dry" One man, prominent among
| the opposition forces said: IF an at
tempt is made by the Anti-Saloon
| League to vote out the saloons in
| Stark county. the business interests
will be INIT in meeting such an eff
| fort. Profiting by the experience of
| districts, which have voted dry, the
| people of this county will have no de-
| sire to have the saloons abolished
| and they will arise in a body to de-
! feat such a proposition on the part
of the ants. Stark county citizens
do not want to see such flourishing
cities as Canton. Massillon and Alli-
ance blotted off the commercial map
by banishing the sale of liquor.
"In the state we will concede vic
tory to the antis in forty counties
| tINC ClCSllOll' hCSS dlt Ludluly
rural counties in which there was lit
tie or no opposition. l look for hard
fights in Mahoning, Summit and Tus-
carawas counties. of this district and
in many others throughout the state
1t has been shown that where city
has had any experience with the
dry" situation, they have in every
case been indisposed to nave con-
,tinuance of the anti ruel. East Liv-
erpool. where the question has been
agitated for years is a fair example
of this. The business men of that
place, almost unanimously expressed
the opinion that had the whole oI
I Cclumbiana county had the experience
of East Liverpool and Wellsville
since those two cities went dry
the result would have been differen
there. Wellsville and East Liverpoo
did profit by experience, and voted
strongly wet" Wooster was another
fair example. Several months age
the "drys" gained a majority in that
city, but after existing for some time
under such a rule the "wets" were il
the majority in the election Thurs
day"
No more local option elections arr
to be held in Ohio until the 18th o
October. There are about ten coun
ties to vote upon the question ye
this month.