Jefferson jimplecute. (Jefferson, Tex.) 1907-1926, 1911-07-14
wu)co = M eaaASUY rnus1!

Sighting tho Sruee, NsAn toere 10
some mistakes In the positioa OF
the party in Texas. II Il NOT .
fact that the prohibition party
represents absolutely the people!
II IL not . conceded fact that the
ants are backed by the greatest
trust in the world. Then where.
In is the consistency Of = politi.
cal party fighting trust at one
point, and fastening another trust
on the people. Which Is the
most beneficial to Texss. The
Waters Pierce Oil Co., or the
Whiskey trust' The fight against
the oil company caused the com
peny to marry-that Is change
Its name. Now they don't want
the whiskey trust to 80 much As
change it's name.
1t is all the purest Of rot TO try
and make people believe the ga
loon, or any number Of them, ever
benefited . place. We mean peo-
pie who have lived where both
prohibition and the saloons have
been tried. Will you please.
consider this question. Do you
question the proposition, that the
fight against prohibition is back
ed by the strongest trust in this
country. Then, are not those
democrats who are fighting pro-
hibition acting INCONSISTENCY.
Should prohibition win on the
22nd, will it not be the peoples
victory over a great trust!
II the ants win will 1t not be
powerful trust winning by mis-.
leading sufficient number of
good people by one pretence and
an other, Misrepresentation, etc.
Why cant all the pleas of person.
al liberty and all other pleadings
by the ants, be appropriated by
the other trust. Is It because
the whiskey can be drank and
the other can not. What right
has the state of Texas to object
to the steel trust coming into the
state. while the administration is
doing it's best to fasten on the
state the greatest trust of the
age, with q thousand times more
evil out come, greater distress,
greater misery, and more AFFECT
poverty. Is there any consisten-
cy in the position of leading dem.
ocrats in their opposition to pro-
hibition.
Has the mothers, daughters
and children no rights that should
be respected Are these rights
which should be the most sacred
to the true man, to be put aside
for political preference, and pro.
motion. Would not the people
vote as = unit against scattering
the Bubonic plague broadcast
over the state. Is there really
any difference so far Is results
go In scattering the plague, OF
fastening saloons on the state.
II the saloons are beneficial, O,
necessary evil, would large cor
porations prohibit their employ
es from frequenting them. Il
this not an infringement on per
sonal liberty?
II two men are equally compe
tent, one frequents the saloon
stays there nearly all night, drinl
ing and carousing, but goes Il
his work regular. The othel
does nothing of the kind-keep.
regular hours. To which mar
would the anti business man civ,
employment. II he was consist
ent he would give the one VIII,
frequent the saloon. II he die
this would he not be encouraging
him in in his bad habits.
Is not the only logical plea tn
ants have, that of personal liber
| ty. Would not the application
of personal liberty literally work
ed out destroy the government
Can there b such q thing IS ab
solute personal liberty and goo<
government at one and the SAM
time.
Is not all the laws protecting
game, fish, and the laws on pres
ervation of the forest infrin9
ments on personal liberty. II 3,
l v,lxv v~lnal - ~~u1~v - v>~~ot1,ak:-