The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1951-10-04
Wants Vote on Sale
of Legalized Whiskey
October 2, 1851
To the Editor:

70 the Editor:
After carefully reading your edi-
torial in this weeks paper regarding
the heavy fines imposed on nine
establishments in this county for
liquor violations. | would like to sub
nit to you and to the voters of Gar
rett county, some of the facts and
details concerning this, in this county.
am taxpayer and property
owner in this county and my business
has made it necessary to visit each
and every one of the places in bust
ness on Deep Greek Lake. | do not
have any interest in either the beer
on whislley business, here or else
where.
| have been fortunate this past
summer in meeting some very fine
people, who visit this area, and have
had first hand their reaction to Deep
Creek and county i'm general.
This is vacation spot, and as such
it attracts people from all walks of
life and various levels of income.
First, they come to this area because
Of its geographical position in re-
lation to other elevations within
two hundred mile radius. When they
do enter our county, they bring with
Pennsylvania, Maryland, District of
Columbia, West Virginia and as far
away as the State of New York.
These people come here expecting the
hand of welcome to be extended to
them, and they do not want various
privileges they enjoy at home to be
denied them here. Why do we sit
quietly by and allow more progress
sively thinking resorts go all out to
please their visitors. If they want
alcoholic drinks why don't we give it
to them? OF the ones not interested
in any type of alcoholic drink, it
should be their privilege not to
drink. What of the hundreds of
others who do want a highball before
dinner? Should it be necessary for
them to bring their bottle with them
into our county? People will spend
their money to satisfy their own
pleasure. Because it is said in our
county laws that they shall not drink,
does that make it true?
Have you ever parked your car on
Saturday afternoon in front of the
legalized liquor store in our adioin-
ing state and counted our Oakland
citizens making their weekly pur-
chase? That money is leaving the
y
our schools, hospital, roads, in fact
many civic enterprises 1t is said, and
it is surely true that our teen-agers
have little or no recreation. Do any of
the parent taxpayers realize that if
we had legalized whiskey and a law
with teeth in it, to control it, that
our teen-agers would not be allowed
in any of the places selling alco-
holics? Do they as parents, realize
the community building possible for
their youngsters enjoyment and the
chances of organized and constructive
play that could be theirs if the money
was available for such a project?
1t has been roughly estimated by
those in a position to know that at
least 100000 annually in revenue is
passing US up. Think what 100000
additional revenue could mean to
this county! Add that to the 100000
that beer alone brings into the county
and try to visualize what it could
mean in reduced taxation. Whether
you or / as individuals would ever
take a drink, we would still benefit
from the increased revenue.
1t has been eighteen years since
the people of Garrett county have had
the opportunity to voice their opinions
on the liquor question. Conditions
have changed in that time, whether
for better or worse, is a matter OF
opinion. | do say this, give US
chance as voters and taxpayers to be
heard on this question. Put it up to
the people, give them a chance to
vote on the question. This is still q
democracy, let's not lose sight Of that
fact. Our country was founded on the
right of every man to have his case
heard, let us give the people of Gar
rett county that chance.
c. A. KISNER
Editors Note:-If Mr.. Kisner had
read my editorial of last week very
carefully he would also have observed
in it the statement that any addition
al money received from tax on
.legalized sale of whiskey either goes
for additional expense Of enforce
ment or increased outlay for addi-
tional families on public welfare. The
cost has always been more than the
gain In another section is given some
facts and figures given by a Howard
County judge in regard to conditions
down there.
Mr.. Kisner also points out that if
we had legalized whiskey and a law
with teeth in it that teen-agers would
not be allowed in any of the places
selling alcoholics. The beer law was
supposed to have "teeth" in it, and
everybody knows what has happened.
Is there any reason to believe it
would be different under another
law?