The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1909-05-15

s. Mays Ball. the magazine writer who
was recently in Birmingham investigating
the working of prohibition for a series
of articles for Leslie's Weekly, has be-
come involved in a controversy with the
Rev. Brooks Lawrence, superintendent
of the Alabama Anti-saloon league. over
an article written for the March Put
nam's Magazine by Mr.. Ball. Mr.. Ball
his written the following letter to Mr..
Lawrence:
Atlanta, Ga, May 10, 1909.
Mr.. Brooks Lawrence, Superintendent
Anti-Saloon league, Birmingham, Ala.
Dear Sir: The May issue of the Citizen
has Just been handed to me by a friend.
In view of the many conversations you
and I had on the prohibition situation In
Birmingham up to and including May g.
I cannot understand the undetermined as
sault you have made on me in your pa
per in which you state: 1.-THE most
mendacious SANDER yet printed on a pro-
hibition state was that published in a
recent issue of Putnam's Magazine by one
s. Mays Ball. who evidently got his In
formation from some near-beer peddler in
Atlanta"
You quote Associate Superintendent
Richards of your league. in Georgia. So
did l.
You and I discussed the question of my
article in Putnam's Magazine for March
and when asked for copy of the Cit
izen you brought to me the February
number when May issue must have then
been out or on the press.
49,
fullness of the article, I could show un-
doubted proof and in discussing the mat
ter with me you only brought up some
point decided by the supreme court of
Georgia since the article has been is
sued. In other words in all our talks, dur
ing all the time when your attack on
me must have been In press or issued,
you never attacked a salient feature of
the article in question
I also informed you that I had
sent copy to practically every minister
of the gospel in Atlanta; that the Consti-
tuition had printed a half-page review
of the article and you in your Citizen are
the first person to attack any statement
made in that special story.
l also told you that I could refer as
to my unbiased report on anything to
Hon. Thomas E. Watson of Georgia, Rev.
Father John s. Gum Of Atlanta, Warden
w. H. Meyer of United States penitentiary
at Atlanta, Hon. Clark Howell of Georgia
and many sothers. In other words, you
acted as I have the fact before me- in
printing the SANDER on me in your paper,
most unfairly.
Wherefore, I beg to request that you
kindly advise me at once why this at
tack; that I will prove every statement
made in my article in Putnam's; that I
respectfully request an immediate re-
traction of your attack on me, that to be
perfectly plain and candid any gentleman
would make, and I ask that 1t be made
Immediately in the Birmingham press
If you will permit a suggestion from
a friend of prohibition, and Just as good
a friend as you are (without the salary
If you will devote a wee bit more time
to closing up the open saloons in Birming-
ham instead of writing editorial leaders,
I think it would pay.
1 ask that you write me at once, If you
please, and 1t is only fair to add that 1
am sending a copy of this letter to The
S. MAYS BALL.
Mr.. Lawrence, when asked yesterday for
statement on the subject, dictated the
following:
I'm declining to enter into a discussion
with Mr.. Ball over the letter, | wish to
say that do not intend to discuss the mat
ter through the columns of any of the
Birmingham papers. I have stated to Mr.
Ball that the columns of the Citizen,
where the editorial appeared are open to
him for statement Of any reasonable
length, and moreover, If he can show me
that his article was passed upon by prac-
tically every minister of the gospel in At
lanta, then am ready to make him such
apology as one gentlemen owes another -
The article in The Citizen to which Mr.
Ball refers in his letter is as follows,
under the title, "A Slander on Georgia."
The most mendacious SANDER vet
printed on a prohibition state was that
published In recent issue of Putnam's
Magazine by one S. Mays Ball. who evil
IDENTIFY got his information from some
near-beer peddler in Atlanta. We print
a statement from Associate Superintend-
Cnl INlSIdLuS VI TIC 1COiBid ltdBut SflOW-
ing that conditions are not so bad as rep
resented by this literary prlvateer who
can make conditions to suit his desires:
Here is a statement of arrests in At
lanta for the months of January and
February, 1sO7-19OS-19o9 as given us by
the chief of police. The records show
an increase of arrests for the two months
of this wear over the same period of Ia st
year. Then we had no beer saloons; now
we have 100 of them, and the recorder
says that nearly all that appear before
him for drunkenness declare that they
drank beer, and but little or nothing of
other intoxicants
when the law went into effect brew
cries, saloons and all went out of bust
that to convict vender it must be proved
first that the drink sold would intoxicate.
which proved to be very hard job, and
the breweries opened Up with so-caled
Notwithstanding beer. ranging from l to
2 per cent alcohol, and continued to in
crease tho per cent
There is no law against selling any
soft or Notwithstanding drinks, and as
long as scores and hundreds of men drank
the stuff and would swear that they could
drink 1t all day and not become intoxi-
Gated, and 1t was next to impossible to
get any one to swear that the beer sold
was Intoxicating, it was impossible to
stop the beer business, so 1t grew In vol
ume and alcoholic strength. But prohi-
bition In the state is not a failure
drunkenness and crime have decreased
Al. 4. l. x&ot< -Av.<