The Lexington progress. (Lexington, Tenn.) 1884-current, 1913-03-14

okRk0tCu OJ poih tOuiNl ChNC w 10
the one above quoted in regard
to temperance legislation. Both
Of these memorandum will be
submitted by me to the Repub.
lican and Independent caucuses
when they next convene. After
ward this question was raised
again by Mr.. Crump, and some
of my friends took q view of this
matter different from mine. AZ
ter the Legislature had met and
organized, a delegation Of friends
Came to me and insisted that !
should agree not to press law en-
forcement legislation, arguing
that if / did we would lose the
cooperation Of the Crump dele
cation, and pointing out the dire
disasters that would follow.
PARTLY WITH CRUMP.
i told them that / was willing
10 cooperate with the Crump
delegation as to all matters up
on which we agreed, but that |
would not sacrifice my convict
ions upon this matter, and that
| was not asking the Shelby del.
egation to sacrifice their convict
ions as to any question.
Il never, at any time or in
any way, directly or indirectly,
publicly or privately, stated or
insinuated that would let down
one particle in my effort to Sc
cure legislation that would end
the disgraceful condition Of open
lawlessness in the cities Of this
State.
For me to have entered into
an agreement with the Shelby
delegation, standing as it does
for the lawless saloons in Mem
phis, that there should be no
law enforcement legislation,
would have been the greatest
treachery to the people Of the
State who elected me. This
would, indeed, have been .
breach Of faith.
Senator Lea could consistent
ly make such an agreement. He
had supported Mr.. Preston on q
pronounced whiskey platform in
the harmony primary and had
supported Mr.. McMilliD on q
worse platform in November.
He was, therefore, sacrificing no
principle in the agreement which
he says he made with Mr.. Crump.
ION the contrary, l had pledg.
ed myself to the people Of the
State on every stump that |
would not only stand for the
maintenance of the present tenn
perance laws, but that / would
fight for additional legislation to
etfectuate their enforcement. In
this fight | never expected to
have the help Of the Shelby del
egation. | always knew their
votes would go against these
bills. 1t is not necessary for
them to seek any excuse for vot
ing to repeal the present four
mile law. They were pledged to
their people to do this. This is
excuse enough. 1t was necessari-
ly but a matter of time until the
Republicans and Independents
would part company with the
Shelby delegation on this ques-
ton. This should have come
without threats, anger or at.
tempted compulsion.
"Idid not anticipate, however,
that the Shelby delegation would
turn tail on several of their i'm.
portant pledges as to public Lex.
islation merely because they had
failed to .coerce Republicans and
Independents into a surrender Of
their viewsson one matter. This
goes to furnish proof that the
whiskey interests will, in the
last analysis, subordinate every
thing else to the benefitsof their
outlawed business.
IMPoTENr MINORITY.
THE Tennessean editorial says
that an impotent minority should
not use it's power, prestige and
patronage to punish the Shelby.
delegation. ! The local legisla-l
ton Of the Shelby delegation
has been treated with great fair,
ness. william effort to enforce
the laws of the State against the
open saloons Of Memphis be a
'punishmentof the Shelby dele
gation?' If 90, just how, please,
If the delegation is composed Of
such splendid patriots as are de-
soribed in said editorial?
Another mistake in the FEN
nessean editorial is the assump-
ton that the effort Of Represen-