The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-06-10
SENATOR PECK
 CORRECTS ERROR
In Communication to Danbury ' News He Points Out Mis-
 statements
MisQuoted, He Takes Opportunity of Placing His Views Before His
 Constituents.

Senator Lester o. Peck of Redding, who as a, member of the senate of 1913 has record for public achievement of which he may well feel proud. has written a letter to the Danbury News explaining his position with respect to the. hotel license bill which attract ed no little attention toward the close of the session.
 made his position so well understood in his discussion of the merits of the legislation that only by careless or inexperienced reporting could he have been nisquoted.
 There never was any question as to where Senator Peck stood on any mat ter that came before the senate and those who admired him for his fine record while a member of the house two years ago have cause for contin- uing their admiration in view of his record as senator.
 He stood valiantIy for every party pledge and on all progressive legisla- ton his vote was cast always for those bills designed to further the vel fafe and comfort of the people. Below will be found his letter to the News which is self explanatory:
 To the Editor of the News: will thank you to reprint the enclosed clipping which comes from your col umns of some days ago.
 t'Of Senator Peck's speech on the subject the Hartford correspondent of the Bridgeport Telegram says:
 Senator Peck (dem.) said: This is a, moral and good piece of legislation and should be passed. The hotels of Connecticut are today selling spirit uous beVeTa ges with meals on Sunday, and it is right and fair that a man should enjoy a harmless drink after a long and dusty automobile ride with his dinner on the Sabbath day. I fa- vor the bilf.''
 Now in reference to this aborted re- port of my speech in the senate a few days ago, I can hardly believe that anyone in your vicinity could possibly believe that I could characterize this as a good piece of legislation for. the reasons given above. It Is so assinine, that am humiIiated to think that you could credit 1t to me. I did say that this Sunday hotel bill fs a moral and good piece of legislation. It Is the awakening of self respecting men that are inn keepers of utterly respectable hotels, men who are unwilling to vio- late the law surrept1tfously. Men who asked before the excise committee to be taxed S450 per annun extra license fee for the privilege of satisfying the demand of travellers on Sunday. This bill provided such licenses could be STd1kLSO O11ly IO 44OlSlS W1I4A LW WOALy five sleeping rooms or more, and that no liquors would be served except in the dining hall of such hotel. I did say, commencing at Greenwich and extending to New London in the prin- cfpal cities liquor was being sold in the first class hotels, and it was not confined to the shore cities. The prosecuting attorneys made no. arrests in such instances of respectable vio- lations' that I knew of; and presum- ably on the ground @that public de- cency was not being offended. But what of the moral impression of the coming generation, and of those of the generation already arrived, when they were cognizant of the fact that privileged classes were immune from interference, because the drinking that was done under such circum- stances was orderly in most instances :? Does not such "a condition counten- anced by the authorities bring disre- spect and contempt for the majesty of justice? The moral part of this law, rests On the fact that in it's passage the Sunday liquor traffic would be lega1ized, whereas now it is violated without interference, and necessity teaches that certain laws are con structed to fit certain instances, and are not for the entirety of the com munity. It is gratifying to know that the first class hotel keepers are ashamed to be in the position of law breakers. even though they may do business at a less cost with the pos sibility of an occasional fine. We will review the side of the motorist who may come into the state on Sunday, and want for dinner, or luncheon, spirituous beverage. If he cannot get 1t here, he will avoid the state. He Is not one that abuses it's use. He rebels at the restriction of what he deems personal freedom. What is the consequence of that class keeping out of the state? It means often the pur- chase of a country place. It means during the year a large sum Of money Left in the state. It means that he has an antagonisa, by comparison of what other states do. Will you let Connec- ticut go on winking at respectable liquor violations will you 1egalize it, and teach those that live within its boundaries that the laws of Con- necticut are real? As for myself, I never use intoxicating liquors in any form, nor am I speaking for this bill actuated by the need of those that do. I realize "that it is apparently the unnecessfties of life that are the greatest necessities" My hope of self pion a bill for the reason ascribed in your teIegraphic report. I thank you in advance for your courtesy in pub fishing this communications.
 Your obedient servant,
 L. O. PECK.