Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, July 31, 1890, Page 10

Special Edition, FIVE CENTS A COPY. —— e s - e s e e ——— T ———" S ———_ ——_"". AlL L SEUIAL SUPPLE CONTAINING THE E BEATRICK DEBATE Between Messrs, Rosewater and Webster (for high license) and Messrs. Dickie and Small (for prohibition) Just as it Appeared in The Daily Bee IF'rom complete stenographic reports, with- out abridgment or alteration, IS NOW READY FOR DELIVERY This debate has attracted speciat attention, notonlyin Nebraska,butall over the United States. the greatest debate upon the prohibition is- Adherents of both sides SWSDEALRERRS. VYT NTIRE It is conceded on all hands to be sue on record. can ~ 1O y AT M &) (o) READ JUST WHAT WAS SAID by cach speaker. Not a word has been changed. While prohibition organs gar- bled the anti-prohibition arguments when printed at all, THE BEE prints cevery word of argument presented in the great debate. Forward Your Orders at Ongce. Newsdealers throughout the west will be supplied on order. Orders for one to a thoysand or more copies will receive prompt attention. N Price 50 2 Copy: 83 a Hundred Remittance all cascs. should order in Address : THE BEE PUBLISHING CO., Omaha, Nebraska. accompany FOR SALE BY ALL NEWSDEALERS. e CHANCE Of a Lif If you haven’t already subscribed for THE BEE and Britannica’ >time. ia Such a newspaper before, the “Americanized Encyclopad }l) you should do so at once. bargain was never offered by If you haven't time to call, telephone us"‘ 38), or drop a postal card and a repre sentative will call on you. HERE IS OUR PROPOSITION: E THE OMAHA I scriptior \perin livered at youradd t of THE AMERICANI DIA BRITANNICA first five volum nd the The ¢ 2 four m NT SuU the advantage layissuc complete CYCLOP great offer, People living outside thems the monthly respon 1 town. Send for descriptiv f O Al offer 1a ean avai ve payments guarante banker or mercha OMAHA THE BEATRICE DEBATE SUPPLEMEN'L. Protest of Led v ling Clergy men, College nd i Mo ns ftutional Prohibi Facts and | wilents St( rofessional Aga tion gures. ton It by A, under o perploxed & resoluti on statistic and roport eport was made prise both among n and of license, arrests, convie for drunkenness dur ibition and _the fo were as follows : HBITION YEARS, 0. 0f Avrists prolibition it was 1 tted in and dofeated b What wero the resy T'his question wtone time that 530 sub, in 1881 and caused much s of prohibit 2 to this report th il sent K five Vears ¢ DRUNKEN Con victions, 10,420 0551 Son tences, Year. 008 LLCENSE Vi No ot *new law did not 0 comparing rot into full ¢ 1574, a full prohibition 3 with 1876, a full license year, it is n ticed that there was the remarkable decre: sentences in 1876 over 1574 1 that for the firs se e in th cuces, a differ- caled that during were 110,849 con- i under’ Lo I the state bad n ¥ in_populatic a terrible showing o roport unties further show wWits most. notice dtistics d for the the or where county, 4,068 in 1874, and o in 1874, and olf, 50) ul that e bearing in i {574 were prohibite 1879 was 4 license year hat the yea ¥ law y 1870, el 18,018 i 181 05 413 415 5 049 17 1874, o8 1870, Adams, Hoston “all River iedford’, 849 404 2055 1,60 170 10 o1 18 30 2 400 25 19 1538 at Wobuin Walthain Cliolsen. o0 Fitehhirg il Worceste When | Mas oppor men t Massachus opposed the President ¢ £ Harvard, said Vot constitutional con Libition. t its most out prof pre; nen Six ont dents of dment shall 1ment wse I to deal be < that th such motingg o of loc , be 1t not 1 250 bi- use Lo pro- ,in my mend- , Wrong in principle. aad Its adoption would be a tomperance and tend to weaken in beliove s vosult of which by the must N in 1l d ofte rohibition wo ment of 2 to local ser 1 5 it, 1t exists under our pres- eut law. To exchange the presont right of each city and Wwh W vole “uo license,” and MASSACHUSETTS - TRIED IT. ¥ Th Beatrice th s opening Debate nd pag ar n W av Francis W TiE SLOCU avenuo, Arthur A, Hall, Edward ( C. H. B Thomas | [| Bernard ward H, Hall, Ca g s nund B, WV 1arles Arey C. , 68 Highlund Park The high 1i cal option Section 1 provides that each county may g malt, spirituot nt, upo thirty of the resiac town if the county is un Paul Sterding N ization, T 1nty b William Lawic tdge. authority to issue any Jos ( liquors in within tw 8 Section 3 provides for t plication and for publica tion for at | ing of the lic mple street, iple street 10 o) I M I I « lic shua P, Be B. Schmi Samel B, Stows W. H. Ly [e] xbury. Sumner U, She wmaica Plafn, B. J. R. Kor Austin § for. onstrance Further scetions y of the remonstranc form of tho license bond by the successful conso, Sections 8, 9 and 10 ishable by 'a fiue of liguor dealer to sell minors or . Vinton V. Hess, We neis G, Burge Langdon C. orge S, Paine, icis B, Horn'! . W. Saltonstall, ‘rawford Nightit Whitt Arthur H, Wright, D James Read, 12 L I [ « C Warren avenue, 5 " ector St Ma iew* ax , Eust B Aug. Prime ) n William k of $100 for awvay any | any E'risby ghton' Sp Welling, Bostor Jdward M Henry Al James e 1. W, M Horutio Gray ton Adolf Bieweud, 716 Parker strect Samicl Hobart Winly, Bulliiich Place chape Philip S, Moxom, AW, Mart Fred C. Hu Williaim Henry i David ¥ of saloonkecpers fol any one in consequenc provide the steps necess claims, Sectio ts? po Thelo tamed in g Whridge. lates to th gi nits. wloption ction 23, the s itu 6 Wostchester park. n, Chel ¢ corporate authori 23 shull have power and prohibit the sellin ny Intoxicating, m u the linlits 3rown, Bro Brown, tiou also bins, N line. Lilton, ation of i ¥ relat 0 press r. Phillips Brooks K P, A. 13 Brooke Herford. Leighton . Hilary Bygravo. . Heury M. Dexter, . Percy Brown, . W. R. Low. ; . Andrew Gray . Father Thomis J. Clnaty, . Edward Abbott, In roegrnse W reqUesty Tor their views on the question, the following replies wero re- celved: Rev. Dr. Honry M. ience from al drun of §1( Section, shable 'S or blivds, sponsibility of fof ment upon the ic tor—1 fayor total 2 a bovi ment was tacked on ideal y which we the drendful crse doubt whetler i wisely be mue aic and [ seriously fear lost the adop- tion of the proposed prolibitoyv 1 Massachusetts at the pre crease rather than diminish which it is aimed Rev. D, be no wi Asam ated with the prohibitic ture. They o ouriony d induced dand good dition that b ils against | hibition should Le subm o. tol—A prohibhory law we The following is the tronger i a us introduce on . Temperance mist bo virtue if we would promote annot prohibit or prave cither use or abus Rev. Brooke Herford-Ibelicve such sump. | Juiuar tuary laws to be entirely vicious in prine Consider aud never more than temporarily racticable The present atgy of things—local option— enables prohibiioa to be carried out wherever there I3 a prevailing seutiment in its favor, and where there is 1ot su-h a prevailing local seutiment it could not ho eaforeed, even if nacted. AS far as [ can sea, what i8 noeded new legislation, but the more effective use of whist we have 1t is not either prohi- bition or specially bi ‘b licenseto which I look the lessening of thie saloon power and of the saloon temptation, but mors effective su- e both by the police and by the Iriends of temperancs, With such cffective supervision we have alveady laws enouch to 0 1y ightly do; without woull, I fear, be a W bouse journals : Aintai Th 15 @ cause, what we must | fav And there shi arately submitt provalor reject constitution of t! nanufacture, sule sale of intoxicating liqu shall be licensed und reg s and ni 150 at itothe ¢ n, an vision, It 15 not the best L EATALD temyperance, It is oul of a natonal method “of promotin final and I Fentdn, Fielligrove Hall, Hampton, Ha Hays, Hill of Lash, L Hobb, amendment, looiss towa tol in any form (us its and that is utopian, It is scatter and sadly divile fove It has coine to be i temperance 1y b ly an v one desive to ma against arrogance, hopes to_the well-wis this wisdirects tho tr of a ¢ the 0 t exty ndicti ts 2 work o ndred Dicki Hahn, Kei states have who vof T loy and An an etoli wduent to the 11 on the 1 practically fon is deg opinion, ev of temy has pic 05t th to accord with it ndent upon 0 when fave nent,! The amc pa 08 7 liguor tra 1ts fr by true that t tis to b noruls the drunkard: i, » beine salvable, I ton ndment 1o v Under th. h are able at liberty t rust that th ution wi statute 1ibitic utry, wha anty Tug Omana ote for the proposed | good work for the peoy ent, To create a | lishingt 10nts age, influential and | the question of biwh 1i re ‘to rebel, is ouly | The question is of import to bring the law iito ' tempt, and in the | thousands of readers swill case of probubition wo | Leud 't drive the | being able to read the wmaking aud selling of ioxicating beverages | not be preseut W Lear, perane find my- to work or itional — amen: > against which intelligent majority is ot It, S| prisonment not exceeding thirly Section 20 provides that the door: dows of saloons shall be kept free from scroens has Jume i 1ts of be foun M3 LAW, sof tho N 1 t ity bo nse for 1 by potat seholders o lor township ¢ ard s uso for thc wporated ville e, he filing of th n of bl ) the hear is filed again o the applicant, the app: rict co g of it an offense, for lic s that any porsc 1 be finec 00 for rovides for the 1 offense, punts forfoitur lic vender to sell offense 1 Lo s oron v dat eof t ity to tralli ollect 1e issuance of f the law is ent part of w ties of all ¢ to license, re ing aw' ituous and v of such cit jout or g having we than e to dr kennoess an ) and cos! 3. ALl Who is Responsible 2 Prohibition agitators never tire of cnarging the opponeats of prohibition with the re- ting the license amend- islature, and they make peoplo believe that the license ame prohibitic amendment by the supporters of high license. ter of fact, the double h to tho e the : ol nists 1 two straddle devil, to ot it d record of the suid elect ar n b e and ors a8 ulated by law kcopi e e o —— S ————— —————" va——————m———e < e he don Lraska ard of 4 hed | ion of t the rgan- 1 not have | of o ap. plica- 4 two weelss boforo the grant- 12 of the st tho dling ant for the li- pun. 1sed ing liquor to i ) trial lable euse, adul vo i y of ¢ and such drug- con- which nd lato ¥ of ous it of ants nor less than 81,000 in citics 4 ists' rog- 4 ud penalties for violation of the rulcs offense or ime and win- found themselves short of votes who 2 with two amendments as 1t appears i the seuate and or their ate in words as follows bevera 1 the WO abst Dunn, B! Gile Hard irist, titution of th Alate the man of i 1 proy 3 Pronos: 1 Work, Her, n d of Ne th ance t be arguments culd Towa's Bxperience Shonld Bo a Le Guido to Nebraskn A PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE SITUATION, | Pronhibition Nas ity L ni to Hypoorioy Heen a il Upon Tavpayer, and Do Ro the 1 i A fow months to d ther thoy will or fon of ! manu fuctu e liquors, it m situation in lowa, uy wh stitut ide by their Lot amend th to prohi Ao of spirituous and wi m L tho malt state so us ar The oth © two states for many wiles udjoin cach e and possess many claracteristics in comon. Itis proper that the experience of Iowa should be a lesson and guide to Nebraska, and espocially upon this vexed and vexlng question of probibition. In this brief_article, and any others which may follow, it will bomy carnest endeavor to tite down facts as to the situation in yoars passed, and give @ plain statement of the facts as they exist today. Those | only partially posted as to these fucts must | admit there have been gross misstatements made and garbled facts stated in relation to theoperation and political effcets of prohibi tory laws wi Supporters, as well as opponents of prohibition, huve been more or less guilty in this respect Llirst, there have been as to tho history of proh instance, meny belicve that Towa tried license, b and _low, us a egulating the Tiquor tra 1 findir method to be & fuilure some ei abandoned license and adopt Whis i true very < The o that Tow did ¢ ke a fair trial of lices territory and sfa made brief trials of crude to regulate t called the “dram | any mf: tion in lowa, for y his ago bition oxtent uever [ lowa had i imperfect laws i whaat was the shop” und the *ive-gallon 1 rof theso laws proved en tisfactory in their practical w . though, from conve s with d judge alargo majori cousider that, erudeas th they were much botter adapted to the welt of the people and the > than the prohib. subsequently cnncted be remembered that along in the iibition camo as a new remedy for tho evils growing out of the ligu 1iko muny other newly discove 11 emedics, b f all of them sub. otically pro: been good medicine forthe practically it was move in Jurious than benefieial to “the paticnt. The romedy was found to be worse than the dis ease. The ger Iy of Towa, utthe session of 154-5, cuacted the first lowa pro hibitory law. But the members wire afraid to tako the entire responsibility of its enact- ment and to escape a portion of the responsi. bility provided for its submission to # vote of the “people at the spring election iu April . The vote taken gave a majority of2,010 for the law, Shortly after the election o) neats of the law commenoed legul procced. ngs to test its valldity and subsequently two of the three }udmo( the supreme couri hel the lay to have boen properly enactod, wh the third, Judge G. Wright, now a re: dent of 'this c held that tho genor: sembly was the 'sole law-maki the state, and could not legully sub- a proposed law to avote of the peo. » Law wus null and void hibitory law went into effect 1t had what was then te; feounty grocer vision that each nay hay body politic, b of cinal amental pur. attachment soon becime v of its patrons und v dar with the peoy Iy, and YOAr Or two was ki of the law. Then in 1858 came anothe ndment which tho truo prol ted fur weakened wid made it of little account o prohibitory me At thattime thore b been aheavy i ormans intothe stat a had made tofl citizens and bad ) prosperit 1 aturally, b their d th the younug, | ican party. 1l 1 the stronirer d t have their Le d to all th 156 of 1 growing r tie for whi ey would detern; lican : them, and perhups others, by of 18 the gen hay ther 2w A n 1sule of and wine was ugain | e and becr elause’ wy breweries aud dne finall e 0 app) caused the in h millious of vics. ppoint The 14, r civeular of that di high cad of yo Then in five years after the oo | of that ulal ihe peogle of lowa will pi hit be well for them to study the | $3 A HUNDRIDa conts THE PROBLEM OF PROHIBITION | 7. of years from 1859 to 1882 miy {nlly y At f, nnd tha hist voeruntil anoth fuiled 1o appear at th 1% Vota s heen A thoe cluim that o | f Tow in faye that dato te majority of f pro bitlon 1 at the voortion ds of 1 perfoos s SUp= [} fourths I'hiey have im thin throos proachors we They In theie favow ntimens e of the stato tho support of mor 5 0f the chirches and o and priests in charge of tho had o widesproad sentimont and they utilizod this tonm) inovery p Wiy Vil o4t wholl, a sentimental campalgn. Facts, fligures an logic wore thiown aside as unworthy of cone sideration. "Thy oxperience of other states with hibition —amendi thougl ofte w was raised that it was home and | mendaeat, ho Were opy L the n fay thers, < and d urged to- take part L and thousinds did s carly o church, p i th 1 of the ghters 1 active { thom it and il profbitiom | papers i1t0 th whose josed to of pro= ¢ e controllor amendn Wi Iy Tple lity S Wi it and to the foreed into neuts s re, On the other sid wniz ore was 1o thorough ion or cen of uction, In 1583 th party, with its orcanized body of I ans and workers, eo not he it could bo in 150, in' s opposts a ho were in their own Judgment oy s constitue palle of resisting o and w od togive it theis pen ops that united us tion supp posit Th vmpai Allant Ot slip= yohibition al ed tha ' threw teu wnads o ol des necos- or outsid theso figzht > purp. sarerated stitomenta untrue, though many hones men uud wonen may have believed in theiw trathi. ‘The weiter ~knows of his own kuows ledge that the aggregate of money contribue ted to carry on this anti-prohibition unn%mg- was ridicdlously small compared with the importunee of the question involved anad ¢ imnic v infevests at stake the most of the money expended, and it was exponded in au entirely logitimate manner, was contributed by citizens of the state and ? by men who had no futerest whate uniary nat in the manufacs f liguors, Another cause aided materd tion of the probibition years the democrats of 1 s minority @ grossly ture or inthe adope amendiot. Fow their, prohibiti the rock Towa migh democrats in 1 or inactive during thi not a particle of doul ats actually w ¢ tho revived. They ¢ ), but they did n whicli the passive ul there 1s o dome voted f thse pro icing g to trial, demar but beea but ts voic I or i party. ropube 1l ine ongh crats isoned we ipon the re tican party has heen jured and ‘weal Frobi of N pr raska o aid itory o of W thely the demo- n do 1 And convies vote prohile s reme v prov 1be n It is constle or our i \nen prope I and bition hition for injusy statute L atany stute, L at any wro in Irift of re i prougd yi high Witk Porter. per, is on s of whisicy to five of uge, ul of whom astly iutoxicated, roc