The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1935-05-23

merely to prohibit the sale of it by
voting against this bill will not in any
manner cure the evil that those who
vote against the beer bill would seek
to obtain.
2. There is an old saying that you
can't legislate morals nor can you sue
cessfully maintain and enforce laws
which are contrary to the sentiment
and natural tendency of the people
This fact has been thoroughly demon
strated by the utter failure of the
National Prohibition Laws which,
after long and fair trial, has been
admitted by its strongest advocates
to have been a failure and in fact a
detriment to the country rather than
a benefit. This fact alone has prac-
tically been admitted by some of its
strongest supporters, and most liberal
contributors, financially and other
wise, to its passage, to have con-
tributed to the decentralization of the
country, to have fostered and bred
racketeers, gangsters, bootleggers,
gunner and other criminal types
which previous to its passage were
unheard of.
3. Because beer drinkers are rare
ly, if ever, Incorporate, they are not
after the "kick", they like the flavor,
nourishment and refreshing qualities
beer possesses, they drink it as de-
lightful beverage, not as an intoxi-
cant. 1t has been demonstrated by
experience that the drinking of beer
has a tendency to promote temper
ance rather than increasing intem-
perance; that it satisfies the appetite
of those who like it and upon failure
to obtain it may resort to hard liquor
as a substitute.
4. Because the legalized sale of
beer in Garrett county will produce
large revenue and thus reduce the
burden now imposed upon the tax
payers of the county. Why lose
this revenue by voting against the
sale of beer here and have this money
taken into West Virginia, Pennsyl-
vania, and Allegany county? You
would still have the beer, lose the
revenue and the beneficial reduction
of taxes and your money being spent
out of our county. This money is
not only spent for beer but you must
take into consideration that spent for
meals, sandwiches, and otherwise.
The failure of the passage of this law
would indeed be serious loss to Gar
rett county, while the legalized sale
of the beer would not only produce rev.
nue., lower taxes, but would increase
the value Of the property in the coun-
ty.
5. Because the bill for which you
will vote on the 28th is a drastic
measure, it takes care of all the
rights of the citizens of this county
and brings the sale of beer within the
law; it provides most specifically who
can sell it, to whom it can be sold,
where it can be sold, and how it can
be sold and for revenue, and in fact
it is most strict in all of its provis-
ions and regulations. 1t completely
puts the bootlegger out of business.
6. We have had the experience of
the traffic of this commodity by boot
leggers and other violators of the law
who sell to minors, both boys and
girls, and you have had this illegal
traffic for a number of years past
without the law, now do not the tax
payers and citizens of Garrett county
who really have the best interests of
the county and its people at heart,
especially the younger generation, be-
lieve that it is time to bring the sale
of beer within the law and the sale
of the same under proper and lawful
legislation as provided by the beer
law on which you will vote next Tues
day?
7. From an economic standpoint,
If is said that orr neiphbOrS in the
counties which adjoin Garrett county
are very anxious that Garrett county
go dry so that they can continue to
consume the revenue and the business
which the sale of beer brings to them.
Is it not logical that they feel this
way about the coming election?
8. You have your officers in Gar
rett county, and supported by this
proposed law. there will be no excuse