The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-09-06
PEOPLES FORUM
An Open Letter to Mr.. Ben p. Owen

Dear Mr.. owen,--I have received from you
number Of letters, accompanied by literature
setting forth the principles and aims Of the
Local self-Government association.
Your letters were courteous. written in APP
parent good faith and you have several times
asked me TO write you my conclusions on the
subject 1 have hesitated to do this for several
reas sons First. ! am reluctant to have my
letter appear in the public print as did Judge
Christians and others but have finally over
come this so you are at liberty to use it II
you wish Second my early childhood. environ
ment and training SO united me for SAFE ana
sane consideration of the liquor question that
feared that I could not do It Justice. What
mean is that while in my home as child. was
taught that evil IF some kind nearly always fol-
lowed its use, and the Virginia town in which
was reared has not had a saloon in forty
wears. THAI community of several thousand
people settled the matter and buried 1T Just as
was coming on the scene of action, which YOU
viii perceive had tendency to still further
rrefudice me against the licensed saloon.
However when l received your literature
decided to read it seriously and study the subject
from the other side ! believe Mr.. Cabelis ad-
dress was the first thing read. / favorably
i'm pressed with the term local SeE-GpNffH~
mont" and other phrases that sounded well
But was soon struck with one thing; there was
much applause from the audience according to
this account of the speech, and it did not seem
To come In at the proper time Nearly always
after the speaker made allusion to some state
or community which is now using more liquor
than formerly, there applause / cannot
understand the kind Of an audience that would
receive sich statements with marks of approval
Surely there was mistake somewhere. Either
| +olI hfNh
cultured and representative one), misunderstood
the speaker the printer got it together wrong
/ Hut ] kept reading and learned some re-
/ lna rlta+le things. I nGvor knew before that
mankind was so perverse that the more difficult
II was to obtain thing the more plentiful it
became, and the less liquor man could get
The more he drank. This was all rather be~ild-
er!ng but / had started in TO study both sides
II this important question and I would not let
prejudice or skepticism blind rne to the truth
| The facts Mr.. Cabeli brought out about Kansas
were positively sickening Most of them are
disputed by advocates Of prohibition, but Mr..
Ca bell In very learned man and / am sure
he must havesknown what he was talking about
noticed thing particularly; that while he
showed very conclusvely. amid much applause
from the audience, that all the other dry states
l'were using more liquor than formerly. he omitted
10 say anything about how much Is drank in
Kansas. l believe the drys claim that whereas
the average consumption of liquor by the coun-
try at large Is valued at about SD per capita,
that Of Kansas is about 81 per capita IL all
that Mr. Cabell said about Kansas Ia true, that
State is certainly In Il bad fix Why. even the
babies are fewer and die earlier than in other
states He also called attention to the fact that
John Brown came from Kansas. which must
have some connection with the subject under dis
cussion or he would not have mentioned It, Mr.,
Cabell is too we'll known as heightened, patrio-
tic citizen to appeal to mere prejudice.
Among the other papers sent mo l read the
enc on increased taxation. I believe the gist of
il Is that the states receipts last year were
81 200 600; expenditures $500, 600 This was
$500 e8a more than was needed. IF we had not
received the revenue from liquor licenses, which
was 1892 900 according to your figures, the State
would have met all expenses and still had s6S.oo0
left The last legislature, you state, raised the
appropriations for the next two years
to s7100,O00. If do without the
lInuor license tax we will have a shortage or
deficit of $4,000. Assuming that your figures
are correct and that there will be abatement
of criminal court costs etc. as the drys claim
here will be, have figured out my part of this
in extra taxation Instead of SIS VIII nave 10
pay $40 increased taxes.
Now Mr. Owen, You ask for my Conclusions,
and here they are:
do not believe there will be increased taxa
ton hut will cheerfuily pay It If necessary.
do not believe prohibition will prohibit in an
absolute sense, but will diminish the use OF
liquors intoxicant and result IN better
citizenship generally.
NV observation is that liquor Is harder to
get where It Is not legally sold; that the harder
It ts to- get the less used and the less there is
used the better 1t is for the community. indivi-
dually and collectively.
do not npugn the motives Of yourself or
associates. but l canhot agree with you and
vote to continue what sincerely believe to be
the greatest of all evils. My duty to my family,
nv neixhbor and my country call me the other
wav I am sanguine that a majority of my
fellow citizens will agree with me in September,
end that virginia will acquit herself in a manner
that Will efTtctuaIly settle the question here
even as It Is settled In sister States to the
north and west of us.
Very sincerely yours,
NJ. w. ATKINS.
Ridgeway, Va, Aug. 81, 1914.
Consider the Consequence