Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1909-02-04
Reply TO the Answer TO
MIR. B. F. Grants Open Letter.

Editor The News"
After % long period of significant
silence the lutcr-Mouuun Rcpubl-
can bias taken its stand against pro-
inhibition. 10 devotes many columns 10 "a
d'icnso of the brewers relueatiou mcu-
sure and plays nap iu bold tync under
req mead lines a. few irrelevant REMARKS
OF senator Gardner who introduced The
law, but gives President Ncphl J.. Nor
rIs who delivered the principal address
GO mass meeting OF prohihltlonists
ut tho salt Lake thcatcr q scaut single
ilne oi mention. And this along with
the boast that 30 is the comfy paper
Chat uarcs ~ print AN the news AN
the time'
boo long windcd, rambling editorial
covering two issues the Republican de-
claros that prohibition is not temper
anCc' aud that prohibition does not
prohibit and then by words and fig
ures DO proves that regulation doesn't
regulate
Il IS afraid that "men with a partisan
AK 60 grind have sought 20 enlist the
support Of better people 20 make pro-
gresS In their own political work"
Why doesn't that apply to the par
ocular politicians and federal and state
oiilcc holders who are behind this so
called regulation bill proposed as a
substitute for prohibition?
Whose AK are they preparing TO grind
when they get the legislature To turn
over 20 them the power to issue and
revoke licenses
What partisan machine can prohi-
billion build up equal to that which
is the inevitable result of such sys-
tenn as that proposed by the Repub-
lican and denounced by the News?
The liquor business IS either right
or wrong. II right why impose such
haH
countenance it at all?
Is THE OPPOSITION LOGICAL.
The organ which IS now defending Che
liquor interests against prohibition
says that prohibition does not pro-
hibit.' No law prohibits the evil
against which it Is directed. The law
against burglary, or horse stealing OF
murder doesn't prevent those crimes
from being committed No one claims
that 90 does But is that "a reason why
such laws should be repealed and otho!
laws enacted regulating the manner m
which those crimes are committed? is
that the logic of the opposition2
II laws are not enforced I'm Maine
or Kansas is IL the fault OF the law or
Of the onicers2 And surely our own eN-
perience has demonstrated that officers
can be as lax in the enforcement OF
regulation measures as they are with
prohibition laws.
Besides. how much more difficult 70
must be 10 sort out the proper from
the improper In a business legalized
and permitted 20 exist, than TO ferret
out and control an evil forbidden by
law and whose effects must necessarily
be- traced 90 an unlawful source.
Tho case Of Maine is cited. But the
paper which claims a. print IAN the
news AN the time" fails to call atten-
ton 20 the fact that i'm Portland, the
city of prohibition Maine" there are
only "a arrests for drunkenness 70 every
10000 OF population, while in rigidly
regulated and high licensed Boston the
arrests FOR drunkenness are 426 for
every 10000 people
a comparison between Kansas and
Nebraska Is made There are GER
tainly fewer drinking places ia high
license Nebraska than i'm prohibition
Kansas" says the Republican
HOW DOES IT KNOW
But how does il know? II makes no
attempt to designate which are saloons
and which are drug stores. Whether
YOU have a prohibition or a license
law the drug stores are compelled TO
take out a government license. The