Bluefield evening leader. [volume] (Bluefield, W. Va.) 1906-1911, 1910-10-01
EXPLANATION 1910.

10 as expresSGl - Va, Eakef.
thelr rights ought to be respected:
that the state government would have
been deprived OF something like
$500 100000 in revenue every year,
which, ii desiresevh" shrdtaoisherdlu
WHICH IL derives fro mthe sale of in
toxicating liquors: that the liquor in
terests and the brewing industries of
the state which have grown up and
been protected by our law, have mil
lions OF dollars vested in the class OF
property which. he says.s would have
been confiscated, and that the meas
ure did not conform ohis ideas OF
Justice; we ask is 1t reasonable to
suppose that a man sincerely enter.
tanning these views would have voted
against submitting the proposition to
vote OF the people, had he really
believed that the measure would have
been held unconstitutional, and there
fore, OF no effect. Isn't It far more
reasonable to supposes that he would
have relieved himself from the re-
sponsibility of deciding this question
for the whole people OF the state by
voting to submit the measure and
allowing it then to have been held I'M
constitutional and OF no effect. there
by putting the matter, for the time
being at least. at rest?
The proposition that there was
wide spread belief that it (the pro.
hibitior amendment was unconstitu.
tional under tho call and would have
had far-reaching and harmful effects
at that time" was mo- doubt newss to
the people when Me. Bsleg issued his
statement this yeaf.SSrhe fact that
| Mr.. Baker did not refer to this in HIS
letter of 1908, would indicate. to say
the least, that It did not then impress
him as q very good reason for his
vote, or one thai the the people would
likely accept.
AS proof that he is not opposed to
submitting the amendment, Mr. Baker
refers to his rote I'm 1909. But that
can hardly oe accepted SIS proof since
he knew then that his v te would not
effect the result and that tho amend
ment would not f1fen~~bc- submitted.
| Place him in the same position again
that he held in 1908 when his vote
decided the question: 9dd how would
no vote Hc had promised many
people prior 10 his. vote in 1908, that
he would vote TO submit the amend.
ment. When he found that his vote
would decide the question he cast it
contrary 10 his promises. Who knows
that he would not do this same thing
under tho same circumstance
again.
Mr. Baker I'm the foregoing state.
mcnt says, referring to his vote in
1908
II believe then as ! do now. that
there werc several good and sufficient
reasons justifying my action n. that
time. but az space forbids mentioning
All ! shall refer 10 only one. and that
is tho constiutionality o tho meas
urc."
What arr the other good and sui
I fcier' Icasona" for hfB action? I'm
I nucetionably nc refers 70 th- reason,
assigned in his letter of 1908. and
which stiii thinks arc good and sun
fcient reasons for hiE vote at that
time
Tho whole record Is submitted fo5
the consideration Of IN. voters and
they have to form their own con.'u.
sions as to ito sincerity Of NJ Bak
er in regard 60 this proposition and
ac 10 whcthe- -, n1f they arc wiIIing
@ again leave iLs.d9ekr 10 one VINO
entertaine the .ft-ro Ia rcgsrd thor