The Climax-Madisonian. (Richmond, Madison County, Ky.) 1914-1917, 1915-06-30
WE ARE NOT EXTREMISTS.

1t is claimed that l am an extremist
for the prohibition cause for the reason
that this paper refused to carry adver-
Using matter for the wet side of the
liquor question.
Just word please.
In assuming my position 1 followed
the course that have followed all my
life. 1t is nothing new to me, nor am
expecting any political rewards for it.
1 am merely following the bent of my
mind. AS lawyer with thirty years
experience at the bar, with seven years
experience as a public prosecutor and
with my individual observations as
citizen of an enlightened community, 1
can not find anything to justify the
continuance of the liquor traffic. There
are volumes that can be written against
| it.
Let me cite some cases which came
before me for prosecution while county
attorney of our neighboring county of
Estill.
Pickett and his two sons who were
indicted and tried for the murder of
Hall, were all drinking when the crime
was committed. 1t was a horrible,
brutal murder. The trial resulted in
one death penalty and two convictions
to the penitentiary for life. In the
| Dai0hboriDo ooun+1, Of DouaII T ,,os nv,
pointed Commonwealth Attorney pro
tenn. At that term of the court pros
ecuted Bush to death for the murder
of his wife and secured two other life
convictions, all the result of whiskey
| Thus in two weeks exactly, had prose-
cuted two men to death and four to the
penitentiary for life. In the seven years
that served as county attorney many
persons were sent to the penitentiary
| for long and short terms and in every
case it was the result of whisky.
In my younger life 1 saw much of
the drunken side of life in an open
town and l determined that every time
that could do so 1 would raise my
voice against liquor. 1 have followed
that course consistently and expect to
continue in the same.
l am aware that there are two sides
to every question, the right side and
the wrong side. My intelligence and
my accumulated experience tell me that
am on the right side. Those who OPP
pose my views no doubt are just as sin
cere in their views as l am in mine.
The reasons that make them so, APP
peal to them and convince them that
they are right. Those reasons do not
in the least convince me that they are
right. Therefore, we differ as gentle
men, and, so differing, entertain the
highest respect for the other. Some
of my best friends are against my posi-
ton. 1 respect them for their candor.
1t is claimed that the liquor question
is public question and as such that
we ought to be willing to publish the
arguments of both sides. But we must
remember that arguments are not al
ways fair or candid. Nor are we under
the slightest obligations to the public
to publish stuff as paid advertisement
which is contrary to our conscience,
nor as to the truth of which we are not
advised. We shall refuse to do so for
the pecuniary profit it may be to us,
preferring to make our money in other
legitimate ways.
With this statement of the case, we
again say that we will continue to re-
| fuse to carry advertisement which may
be sent to us by the liquor side of the
question. We submit to the better
| judgment of the fathers and mothers
of the county whether or not they want
papers coming into their homes carry
ing liquor arguments as advertisements,
thus poisoning the minds of their young,
immature children or whether they
want paper that stands four square
against the liquor traffic and is willing
to forego many of the blood money
dollars of organized vice and crime
rather than to carry matter into your
home that may destroy your family
GRANT E. LILLY.