Licking Valley courier. [volume] (West Liberty, Ky.) 19??-current, 1913-06-26


ator E. E. Hogg as a candidate
for the democratic nomination to
succeed himself for State Sena-
tor from the 34th district. The
letter from Mr.. Hogg to Mr..
Stephens explains the Senator's s
position and renders editorial
comment unnecessary, We be-
speak for his claims a thought
full consideration on the part of
Morgan county democrats:
Bonneville, KY, June 9, 1918.
Mr.. E. L. Stephens,
Salyersville, KY.
My Dear Sir:
1 beg leave to acknowledge
yours without date, written on
the back of my letter to Capt.
Prater. Your note contains a
very curt, yet comprehensive,
communication, for which allow
me to thank you on account of it's
unmistakable frankness.
am sure that quite a large
number of people have been mis-
led by the slogan, County
Unit" Never in my life did |
advocate the sale of liquor, nor
did ever vote for the sale of
liquor in any local option contest
or election, but on the contrary
| have consistently advocated To-
cal control of the whisky ques-
tion and in my position against
what was termed the County
Unit Bill" | did not deviate from
the course | have always pursued
towards that question and which
l hope to'be able at all times to
follow on every public question
that may arise.
l believe that political ques-
tions should be plainly, simply
and honestly stated, so that the
name or term will not deceive OF
mislead the people. This was
not done in the case of what has
been termed the County Uni
Bill. "@.
By the use of the term "Coun
ty Unit" the people were led Il
believe that it meant that tht
county was to be the unit; that il
to say, that if a majority of thu
people of the county should vote
dry, then the whole of the coun,
ty should be dry, and if on thu
other hand a majority of the peo
pie of a county should vote wet,
then the whole county should bt
wet, subject however to high Ii
cense and strict police control
This was not the bill that yol
say now | ought to have support
ed. The bill that was passed
and which l was against is call
ed the County Unit Bill" bu
it does not make the county tn,
unit. for under that bill the peo
of the county do not have con
troll of the question completely
To illustrate, suppose that ever.
voter in Magoffin county shoul,
want to vote whisky into tina
county and at Az election sa
that they did all vote for it, nov
under what you and many othe
good people think is the Count
Unit" the election could not al
feet any portion of Magoffin tina
had by a special statute or by a
election Heretofore held bee
made dry territory.
Again under the bill that
misnamed County Unit, " shoul
the majority of the voters in
county vote dry, then all tn
county is dry and no portion {
the county may take a vote an
vote wet, but if a majority of tn
people vote wet, then any pol
ton of the county, a town, di,
! trict or precinct, may by itse
take a vote and vote dry. L
, you think this bill was under
/ stood by the people? Do yC
think that legislators ought
|, deceive the peoule in the namin
t of a law?
Local control by the people
/ the whisky question undoubted
r means that a majority of the pc,
9 pie of the locality should hay
|. the power to say either wet
: dry, and the same locality thj
$ can by their votes say dry shou
|. be allowed, if they wish, to IS
{ wet, and this is what the peop
:, thought they got in the so-call'
4 County Unit Bill, but they a