Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, November 1, 1890, Page 9

¢ N Voices From the Pulpit Against Enacting a Prohibitory Law, PROVED A FAILURE WHERE TRIED. Kansas Ministers 8how That it Has Re- sulted in Moral Corrption, IOWA BRETHREN AGREE. AND THEIR A Berions to the Material Development of the Country. Tuped $ment SIMILAR SENTIMENTS FROM DAKOTA Nebraska Pastors Testify of High minisning tie Vice of Drunk- the Efi- deney Liconse o Di enness and Attendant Evils, In order to ascertain the practical opera ‘ions of prohibition in the es gt Towa, Kansas and South Dakota, lettors were 1o pastors of churches in for their opinions on the effect of prohibition in their communitics, both in a moral and ma tevial way, They were also requested to state for publication their own sentiments in regard o prohibition as compared with high license and local option. Letters w sent (o a number of Nebraska clergymen sicing how they stood on the proposed pro- hibition amendmont to the Slo- cumb law. The following replies lave been biy st sent those states askin as opposed J. Ansorge, “Tlie morals of 3 have not been improved by prohibition, nov has the material development of the town or county been assisted by the luws, and the people generally would vote to repeal thom think the liquor trafiic is best controlled by high license.” Rev. A, Ehler, Gray, T, writes: “How e prohibition law elovate or improve if it does not prohibitt T do not know of any us- sistance the law has given the town or county in the way . of development. People make ¢ honie Jiere not unt of prohibi tion, but on nccount of the fine country, Ac- cording to my acquuintance, the peopie here would all vote for the repeal of the law; some who voted for it once would now, if possible, cust a dozen yotes to repeal it. 1 would like to see prohibition substituted by a Ligh li- censo luw. Rev. L. Traub, Newall ask if the morals of this community have been clevated or improved by the prohibitory laws of the state. I can unhesitatingly say that they have not, and_ the material development of ‘the county and town h impeded Many farms are for sule and very fow buyers put in an appearance. If a provosition to re- peal the law was submitted to the people a majority of the people, whose views are known to me, would vote in favor of repeal ‘am opposed to probivition and favor bigh 1i cense," Iev, P, Menick No sir, the morals of Fort Dodge, Ta., this community Ia., writes: “You . State Center, Ta,, writes this community have not been improved, on - the contrary morals have been lowercd and secret drinking hus been taught by the prohibitory laws of the state, The bottle in the pocket is more de moralizing than the glass on the bar of saloon. Every one knows and every one will admit that the laws bave impeded the devel- opment of the county, und @ great majority of the voters would vote to repeal them, T favor high license and local option; L am op posed to prohibition,” Q Rey. H. Webking, Alta, Ta., writes: “The niorals of the comuiunity lave not been im- proved by probibition. A majority of the people whom Iam tamiliar with would vote o repeal the law. 1 am in favor of high license and local ovtion.” Rev. Ph. Harndschlke, Sumner, Ta., writes: “Not in any respeet liave the morals of this omunity’ been improved by prohibition. he drinker now goes to his® cellar or side- board ; formerly he visited a saloon. As to the material dévelopment of the county I ean only say that more taxes are collectéd now than before the prohibition laws were passed Qur county was, before the law republican now it is demoeratie. Such a change in political sentiment auswers quite fully it our people would favor a repeal of the law or not. I amin favorof high license, but uot Burdoch of Washineton ghts, Lo, until _quite recently a resident of Luvene, In,, wr he morals of the community in and about Luvene were not im- proved by prohibition laws. No, sir, the: were not, and the people there would vote fo ropeai them, 1 ain favorablo o high Jicenso and against prohibition.™ Rev. J. Horn, Kiliuger, la., write “Pro- hibition closed the open suloon, but for every saloon closed two or three mysterious whisky Boles opened up, 80 anyone can see that g hibition did not improve movals, Our neig boring county expended, last year, in prosceuting violaters of the prohibition law and collected from them between 60 and £400 in fines, so anyone can see that pi hibition has not added’to the material devel- opment of the county. This township, Max- field, is peopled with good, moral inhab- itants; it an opportunity was given them they would cast a solid vote for the vepeal of the prohibi laws—there would not be two votes against repeal. In my opinion high 1 cense—not local option —is a thousand tin preferable to ‘u'nhinilinn } Rev. H Jacobs, Westgate, Towa, says: “No, the morals of the community have not been improved by the prohibitory laws of the stato; on the contrary, the liws have de- graded the morals of the community: the compel men to muke swine of themselves, in that they cannot buy less than too much at one time: any trathful man cannot purchase liguor without soiling his conscience, The wmaterial development of this county has been impeded; o majority of the peaple would vote for a repeal of the law with heart and soul. They have learned that such a law is ruin to any state or nation, It is their down- + fall; no legislature can clevate morality by law; high license is what could and would fmorove the condition of our state and the pople.” PRV, Theodore Walf 100, 1ow writes: “I was not a resident of the statabe fore the probibition laws went iito effect, so T cannot say if the morals of the community have been improved or not, but I can say that I notice they ure not better than in states where the manmfacture and sale of intoxicating liquors is not prohibited by law. For the same reason--non-residence previous to tho passuge of the law 1 am not competent to pass judgmeat upon the devel- opment of the town since the law went into effect. The reduction of the prohibition vote from T8 in IS8T to 112 votes 1850, would very naturally lead one to believe that if the people of this county had an_opportunity to vote for the repeal of the law the majority of them would do so. My personal profercnces are for high liconse and Lo option, and 1 Would vofe to repeal the prohibitory laws of the state.” Rev. Carl Schmidt of Elna, la, “writes: No, the morals of this community have not been improved by the prohibition laws; on the contrary, they have gonoe lower. Under # license law this town bad two saloons, to- day it has five or six, where boys from twelve to fifteen years of ago can procure drinks; and such boys are frequently seen drunk on the streets, as are wen and women! The laws have impeded the progress of the town. Many who were prohibitionists four or five yeurs ago are now enthusiastically in favor of vepealing the prohibition laws: I think the wajority of our people would favor repeal, As o myself, I am in favor of repealing the present laws, and would like to have local option and high license; then the saloons wouli be controlled, and the shageful sales stopped, and the shameful acts now witnessed on the streets seen no more." Rev. F. W. Heivke of Bauer, Ia., writes: “The morals of this community have not been elevated nor improved, but hypocrisy has been increased. Accordiug to the veport of the late census the population of our county has decroased; so the material devel- opment of the county hus been impeded and not assisted by the probibition laws of the state. Many who voted for the laws in 1582 pow admit that fact. To the bestof my knowledge and information obtainable, & ma- jority of our people would vote for the repeal of the laws, as they recognize it a failure— nd %0 admit, even those who voted for it and supported it for years, Ifuvor the euactment m THE OMAHA DAILY BEE SATURDAY | of & license | will not inter! Rev. W. Faulstick of writes: “As to the improvement community I cannot pass judgment, since I did not live here when intoxicating liquors were sold ly. 1 caunot give personal Judgment a rvdevelopment of the county Our people would vote agaiust probibition in each and every As to al dis position will say I am oy to prohibition since 1t is based on entir prin It should be repealed Rev H. Brammer of law, With such n with personal rights Whitmore, Ia. of the to th o Lowden, la st degred have N 1 improved or hibit [ do not of the ty by them, Our vejealing probi has b od peop i s for bition the question was submitted to th I would vote for repealing prohibi tion myself, beeause T am o temperate man i belfeve thut no law nake o man tem perate ey G, Lohr the orals of thi been improved by prouibition Jaws, nor tne material development of the sisted, Our \ 1 e f the ln ! I am in ! In Dubugie county, where the law was never cfor Rev. V. P. Gossweiler of Dexte writes: “[ have not paid any attention to th facts, henee | cannot say if the morals of th community have been improved or noy the ame answer must be @iven to the develop: ment of the county under prohibition laws, | I believe that a majority of the voters would be opposed to repealing the laws. I think prohibition wrong, henee to repeal the lnws would be right; high license is the best pos of the temperance questions local option is tyranny on & smail scale; local option the less, prohibition the greater evil, If nothing is left but a choice between the *wo, then I would favor local option.” | W. B.,of What Cheer, In., writes: “I have not noticed any improveient in morals under prohibition laws the con trary, 1 often see some one reeling the streets unable to the load of liguor he has im- bibed, To me prohibition seems to be an attempt to make men pious by law; it teaches Iying and false sweariig. In my opinion it has impeded rather than assisted the development of the coantry. The tax- payers in_my neighborhood complain a good deal of the burdens that probibition loads upon the, and I believe that a majority of them would vote for a repeal of the laws, Personally T think prohibition a religious fraud and a political failure, [ have always advocated temperance aud condemned drunkenness, The repeal of the prohibition law and the enactment of a high license law wonld benefit the state and the people.” Rov. W. 1. Strobel of Wilton Junction,Ta., w During my seven years' residence in Crawford county,” if my observations can be taken for grounds for gn opinion, I must say that the morals of the community have not been improved, for all that time beer and dancing parties idcreased in number from Sunday to Sunday, and as a consequence the attendince upon chureh services decreased. People do not, nor will not, look upon the cssion of the prohivition laws as a L and o that way learn to trausgress luws —miorul us well ds st F'romtho working of the law I think the development ot that county (Crawford) has been material- Iy impeded without a doudt, an_over whelming majority of the people of that county would vota for its repeal. Personally, m for repealing the law, and favor tho it of a high license, local option { Sheriil Mount, Tn,, mu iave not has ¥ been the re for was g ensc e ven lived, Ia sibie solutlon is A. €. Doerfiler of Amelia do not believe that prohibitory improve or elevate the mora wunity. Prohibition lnws to make drunkards. Uunder them temperato drinks are havd to get, while whisky by the pint or quart is not, If a drinking man could pet. what he wanted when he wanted it. the purchase of stimulants by the quantity and the drinking of intoxicants by the quantity would not be so frequent. No, the law hus not aided in deveioping the cou ather it has impeded development. T am against pro- hibition und in favorof a high license law. Rev, A. C. Steege of Council Bluffs, la., writes cannot see that prohibition has Drough about any great improvement in the the direction ~ of true temper: As prohiition does not pre what it would prohibit 1t unnecessarily, to say the least, has made aviny of law-breakers. As we have no pro- hibition in fact I cannot say that it has im- peded or aided the development of the city or county. The majority of the people whose predilections politically are known to me are opposed to prohibition, and would vote to re- peat the law. I consider high license, pro- vided it be consclentiously and justly exer- cised and cnforced, to be the most justifiable, and at the sawe time the most efticient damper on the evil of drunkenness.” Rev. ¢, W. Baumhoefener of Homestead, ., writes: “No, the morals of this com: ity have not been improved by the pro L and the development of Towa county been impeded by them. Our people would vote for repealiug the laws, as I would myself. Tamin fayor of the enict- ment of a high license law." I Charles W.Ott of Atlantic, Ta.writes : S0 was 1ot a resident of this state before the passage of the prohibitory law, but if hypoc- risy, perjury. open sceret violation of the law, vile, adulterated liguors should be con- sidered o moral improvement, the morals of this state must have improved wonderfully From what T hear 1 should judgc that onr city property is worth scarcely two-thirds its former value, To what extent prohibition i responsible for this T am not prepared to say. 1am in favor of the proposition 1o repeal the prasent prohibitory law aud would endorse a higlh license systei.' Rev. L. A, Muller of Odebolt, Ta., writes: “The movals of the community haye not been by prohibitory laws. Prohiibition n cause to secret dram shops in our town at least. Odebolt would without doubt be more of 4 town if we had one or two ro- spoetable saloons. 1 believe a_great major- ity of the people I know would vote for re- poaing the law. 1 am against vrohibition ecause it leads fo perjury and other crimes, Rev. C. Hafner, Leavenworth, Kas, writes : “Pue worals of this community Bave not been elevated by prohibitory laws. The town’s growth has been impeded to the ex- tent of reducing the poputation fully 10,000, Tam in favor of repeal, provided high license s substitutod.” Rev. %, Brust, Dubuque, Ta., writes: #The law was never for a moment enforced in Du- buque. This very non-enforcement of a law, in my opinion is inwise and has bad a_ bad influence upon the morals of both old and and young men. 1 am certainly for repealiug and in favor of high license and every possi ble and practical control of the saloons, but against local option, because the tyrany of o small majority of a county or township is the same and unjust as the tyrany of a big ma- jority of a whole state.” Rev. B, Riedel, Fort Dodee, Tn., “If false swearing, and in consequence this contempt of the laws is elevation of morals in our country, then we have a great deal of it.The probibitory laws have never assisted us and in o great’ many cases hav injur 1 aw in favor of repealing the pro- hibitory law and adopting a high license Sys- tem, bt not too high, as_the orderly peoplo have to bear the burden.” Rey, I, V. Strope, Montecello, Ta., writes: “Tg the best of my knowledge the morals of Monticello people have not been in the least improved by pronibition, as it does not pro- hibit. 1 think such prohibitory laws can never und will never be enforced in any state, The law has given us no assistance but I can- not suy how much it has impeded the growth of our countyand town. The majority of us liere ave in tuvor of repealing—the sooner the botter Rev. I P. Guerther, Boone, Ia., writes: ““The morals of our community have not been eievated by prohibitary laws. The develop ment ot our town and county has been imp ded to a swall extent, Lamin favor of peuling the laws and am in favor of high li- cense and local option." Rev. G, Hoar, Hubbard, Ta.,writes we have hiad prohibitory laws th the community have not with probibition and introdue cense system," Rey. 1. Studt, Luzerne, Ta,, writes: ““The prohibitory luw has hnd the opposite effect to moralize this community, It has caused no development and 1 am decidedly against the law. 1 am in favor of a high license sys. Tn,, writes: Taws will of anv com- have a tendency writes of ‘Since morals of improved. Down the high li- A. D. Greif, Davenport, Ta., writes: “Prohibitory laws have not improved the morals of this community. Development ot our county has been impeded, but to what extent 15 unknown to we. I am in favor of repealing the prohubitory law and substitut- ing bial liceuse, Dow' kuow wbout local op- tion, Rev. J. Avon, Athens, Benton county, Towa, writes: Hypocrisy has been flourish: ing; lying, crimes ralsed” as if in a hotbed; more arvests for drunkenness than in_ cort sponding years before. Prohibjtion has dam. aged our fown more than a civil war would | gulations as | has | haried today | less in a4 rather s tomorrow I would de liver the funeral sermon free. I have lived here for eleven years and know whereof I speak TRav Deckman, Cedar Rapids, Ta., writes The morals of the community have, according to my opinion, not improved. but are rather diminishing. The materi development of our county and town has n been assisted by prohibition, If a proposi tion to repeal the present prohibitory law in 1" wo than v done prohibitio | our state shoutd be submitted, the majority of the people thi at 1 know woull vote for re Ishall vote for high cal option every time,'" Schlicpsiok, Poreroy, [a, writes t dived in Towa long enough to « pare the morals of now with former times know, however, they are no better than the morals of communities where prohibition is a stranger, Onr county has made wonderful eress in the last few years, but not as a nsequence of the prohibition laws, but from natural resources of the county. Liquor has been consumed as before, but the monoy was all sent out of the state. [ consider pro hibition as it now is here, in givect opposition to the word of God. T am in opposition to prohibitory laws with heart and soul and in fayor of v i high license.” Rev. A. Dommann, Ireton,Sioux county, la., writes: “There i plonty of beerand wiiisky in fowa and I tell you it nl, too. But every one who sells it and drinks it is, in the eyes of the moral clement a law-breaker and an immoral 'n. 1 am for repsaliug the law because intoxicants are now sold free, that is without moral or legal control High license would at least bring the abuse of selling and drinkivg intoxicants under public control o Rev. ‘W. Mallon, Herudon, In., writes “There has been no improvement of morals, but on the contrary people are forced to lie. They have iutoxicants shipped under false denotation. ‘They buy brandy by the gallon and more, and drink it in wuch larger quanti ties thaz though they could buy it by the drink. The law has impedea the growth of our county greatly, We have five families every school district. We get 5 cents ess on every bushiel of corn, Houses in town empty and taxe very high. There no new comers, good prohubition ist in this community ¢ sses that there is wrong with our prohibitory law vote against it Wo are in favor of a reason license and tocal option. Not because Iam in favor of drunkenness, but because I am in favor of so briety, honesty and pi y of my beloved Towa. Now, my dear sirs, if you would like tosee your state damaged as iuch as _possi- ble, have our prohibition imported. But if you would like to see your state prosper, do all you can to have it prevented, This is my experience after living fiftecu years iu fowa.” HIGH LICENSE G license Ry ST have nd | gt JOD ENOUGH, Nebraska Ministers Who Sta Slocumb Law. Rev. G. Jurg, Waco, Neb, writes: “1 would not vote for a constitutional amend- ment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liquor. I consiiier the enforcement of bition an abridgement of the inalien rights of man. It is my opinion that there would be just as much drinking, it would make more hypocrites, ana things would be altogether worse than they are now should a prohibition amendment b adopted. 1 would advise my friends tovote against prohibi tion.” Rev. H, W. Hohn by the Deshler, Neb., writes “A constitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sule of liquor would not meet with my approval. 1do not believe that any state has the right to dictate what we shall eat or drink. I think the adoption of the pronibitory amendment will make hypocrisy and” dim trade of our country. 1 would not advise my friends to for prohibition L. Poepertern, Beatrice, 1 would advise the people of vote against prohibition.” Rev. P. Mocllening, Bazile Mills, Neb., writes: 4L am of the opivion that the St cumb law tends to diminish drunkenness. 1 would 1ot vote for o law probibiting th manufacture and sale of liquor. The enforce: ment of prohibition is wn abridgement of lts. A prokibitory law would in- o drunkenness, lawlessness, hypocrisy ther evils. 1 tope my friends will vote {nst prohibition.” Re Bromer, Pierce, Neb, : “The Slocumb law'is a good one and would diminish dvunkenness if enfoveed. 1 inst a constitutional amendment prohibit- ing the manufacture and sale of liquor, The prohibitory amendment, if adopted, will prove the greatest disaster our state his ey met. The personal rights league will vote gainst prohibition at the coming election T'he most of the inhabitants of the county ave against such & measur Rev, M. H. Pankow. Norfolk, Neb,, writes : “Tbelieve that sobriety and temperance ~an best be promoted by the high license and lo- cal option laws, wherever they are enforced, 1 will not vote for the proposed constitutional #nendment. 1 believe that an attempted re- form enforced on an unwilling people will not reform, but will operate to the contrary in many w 1 would advise people to vote against prohibition.”! Rev. W. Barder, Schuyler, Neb., writes: 1 consider the Slocumb a good law. T would not vote for a constitutional amendment pro hibiting the sale of liguor. The adoption_ of the prohibitory amendment will ot being any changes for the better, but for the wor: as1t ereates disobedience to the laws, hy pocrisy and other wrongs. 1 advisé my friends to vote against prohibition for a social, moral, and above all, a religious point,” C. A, Scharfer, Glenville, Neb., writes: 1 do not believe that the high 1" cense law tends to diminish drunkenness, be- 1501t is not enforeed. The adoption of pronibition would relieve us of many evils connected with the saloon, but would foster lying, deception, perjury and fanatic- ism." Rov, A. can Neb., writes: Nebraska to Long, Fremont, Neb., writes: We better’ control the liquor busi- ness in_an open saloon than the sale of liquor in the dens of prohi- bition states. In my opinion prohibition would result in ruining the bright prospects of our state, would make the people defraud- ers andhypocrites, as the prohibition states of Towa and Kansas clearly show. I shall continue to advise my people to have the Slocumb law enforced.” Rev. W. Brakhage, Malcolm, Neb,, wr “I would not approve of a ' constitution: amendment prohibiting the sale of liquor, and would advise my friends to vote against' pro hibition.” Rev. B. Kawitter, Molden, “In a general way 1 belie law tends to diminish drunkenness. I think that a prohibitory law would be for the worse, and I advisé my friends to vote against prohibition.” Rov. A. Hefins, Fontanelle, Neb,, writes “I believe that a high license’ law tends to diminish drunkenness. 1 would not vote for the amendment, as 1 feel that any change from the present system would be for the worse, 1 advise my friends to vote against prohibition.” Iev. L. Mueller, Elk Creel, Neb., writes: either myself nor the people with whom 1 am sssociated will approve of a constitu- tional amendment prohibiting the sale of liquor. lu my opiulon the change would be for the worse, and I shall vote and advise against prohibition.” H, Wind, Millard, Neb., writes: “I do not approve of & constitutional amendment pro- hibiting che sale of liquor. The enforcement of prohibition would act in_direct opposition to the words of St. Paul, ‘Let no man judge you in_meat or in drink, ete. When- ever God binds by lis word we say amen, but not so when man would bind where God has given liberty. Prohibition promotes hypocrisy; it promotas perfidiousness. |1 would advise iny peoplo to vote against prohibition because such a mov ment as this cannot promote the cause of It does not stand the test of Neb., writes e that the Slocumb Rev. J. Desch, Tmperial, Neb, w “High license tends to diminish the vi drunkenness, for it brings the use of such beverage at the most under the control of all sober, honorable men. I um opposed o a coustitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liguor, for & misuse never abolishes the right use. I consider the euforcement of prohibition an abridgment of the inalienable rights of man. _The bible teaches Christians a Chris- tan liberty in eating and drnking, Christ himself teaches that the right use of driuking is not making the man profaue, He himself made wine for drirking. The result of prohibition would be for the worse. It as- sists hypocrisy ; makes every nelghbor a spy, and interrupts the social, peaceanle neighbor: lood. 1 shall advise aud vote agalust prohi- bition.” Rev. G. Bullluger, Clearwater, Neb., writes: “I am opposed to the amendment, for experience shows me that prohibition does not prohibit. I regard the eaforcement of prohivition an abridgement of the rights of wan, Should prohibition be enforced it woula fill our coumtry with hypoc would most certainly advise my peop! against prohibition.’ Rev. M. Adams, West Point, Neb, High license, 1f strictly enforced, will | | diminish drunkenness. [ am opposed to the proposed amendment, a8 1 do not believe its | enforcement would be for the botter, Drunk- | cuness in the secrot deprives the state of its 1 taxes, makes hypoerites who pretend to bo such in order to_get a drink of liquor in the drug store, and encour i in many ways. 1 would advise peonle to vote against prohibition." Rev. (. G. Gundell, Berlin, In my opinion, a high license liquor law tends o diminish drunkenness, 1 cousider | the enforcement of prohibition an abridgment | of the fnalienable rights of man. Its en forcement would prove for the worse, and 1 therefore advise my people to vote against | prohibition.’ Rev. J. C. 1. Burmelster, Storling Nob., writes: I am of the opinion that the Slocumb law tends to dimnish drunkeniess The constitutional ameadment prohibiting the manufacture and ssle of liquor doos not meet my approval, not a single vote will be cast in favor of it by my people, Prohibition | is an ubridement of man's rights. It means golden times for bootloggers and will - muke many perjurers and hypocrites, 1 would advise everybody to vote for high liconso and agaiust prohibition, Rev. J. H. Hoffman, writes: “The slocum good one, and_tends to nese. A constitutional amendment prohibit ing the manufacture and sale of liguor would not meet the approval of the people with whom [ am associnted, wor myself. To eat and deink that which is wholesome for my Dody is an inalemable right, a vight founded in nature. Prohibition promotes hypocrisy, perjury, ete. Twould advise the people of this state to vote against it i Denninger, Madison, Neb., writes : he Slocumb law tends to dinmish drunk ennes s enforced, The country peo- | ple bu the keg and whisky by the allon‘and drink as much as they please. A istitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liguor would not meet with the approval of the people with whom 1 am_associated. | consider the on forcement of prohibition un abridgemont on the inalienable rights of man, aud its en forcement would be for the worse, It would make both the sellors and consumers hypo- crites, und annoy those who need stimuluting beverages as medicine or wine for sacrs mental purposes. 1 would advise the people of this state to vote against prohibition." Rev. J. . S, Her, Omaha, Neb,, writes 1 am satisfied that the Slocumb law tends to diminisn drunkenness, A constitutional menduent prohibiting the manufecture and e of liquor would not mect with the 1 of the people with whom [ am asso 1 consider the enforcement of prohi bition an infringement on a man's personal erty an rights. Its enforcement would result in hypoerisy, theft, secret drunken ness, violation of the law by those selling and purchasing liquors, and many othe evils are introduced by prohibition, as experi ence shows, My appeal to the citizens of Nebraska is to vote against prohibition. Re- the rights which God has given then wedy evils, but not inercase them % Huber, Kramer, Neb., writes: 1 think that high license tends to diminish the vice of drunkenncss, I sposed to a constitutional amendment prohibiting the nufacture and sale of liguor. The en- nent of prohibition would in my opimion v the worse. The members of wy church as well as myself will vote uguinst prohibition.” Rev, G. Mueller, Lincoln, “Am of the opiuion that the tends to diminish drunkenness approve of a constitutional prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liquor, us I believe prohibition to be an in fringement on a man's inalienable rights The enforcement of prohibition would result for the wor<e und [ advise my people to v against it v, A, Baumhoefener, Grand Island, eb, wrote: “High license is the proper law, and it should be_enforced vigorously. 1 can'hardly believe that a person who will vote fora constitutional amendment prohib. iting the manufacture and sale of liquor 1 be of sound mind. The next thing the prohibitionist will axk will be an amend- ment to abolish the use of coffee. Should the proposed amendment be adopted we would have more drunkenncss aud.more violation of the law than now. This I have oxpericnced in the prohibition state of loww, - My advice would be for everybody to vote against y hibition, hecause T do not,want man to for what God i " Rev. H , Lingoln, Neb., writes: “My observation i8 thaty the Slocumb law tends o diminish the vige of drunkenness. A probibitory umendment would not meet with wmy approval. as 1 censider that proh bition means anything but personal safety. and would resuif for the worse. I therefor would advise the people of Nebraska to vo against prohibition ’ Rev. C. Volz, Eustis, am opposed to an amendment prohibiting the manufactare and sale of liquor, as I regard such 4 measure an abridgment of the inali able rights of man. Should prohibition be enforced worse results would follow. I would advise the people 0 vote against pro- hibition,” Rey. J. Casenbusen, Monley, Neh,, writes: 1 thiuk the slocumb law would be sufiicient if enforced. The people with whom 1 am associated are opposed to the amenament, as they consider it an abridgment to their vigiits, and believe that worse results would come from an effort to enforce prohibition I shall therefore, by all means, vote agunst prohibition.” . Rev. (. Schubkeyel, Blue Springs, Neb., wri I favor the Slocumb law and am opposed to the amendment, as it interferes with a man's personal rights. In my opinion the adoption of the prohibitory amendment would be a curse, both socially and finan- cially, tothe people of our state. I shakl therefore most emphatically advise the peo plo of this state to vore against prohivition at the coming election.” Rev. A. Larson, Blair, Neb., writes: I do not approve of a constitutional amend- ment prohibiting the wmanufacture and sale of liquor, as I considerit an abridgment of the inalienable rights of, man. Should the amendment be_adopted the result would be for worse and I would advise the people of this state to vote against prohibition.” Rev. C. H. Siltz, Avapahoe, Neb., write: “To some_extent the sioeumb law tends to diminish drunkenness, 1 do not approve of the propofed amendmeut, as I consider it an infringement upon the vights given me by God, 1ts adoptirn would only change honest men to hypocrites, and cause the people to transgress laws ‘and thereby sin, which would not be if there were 1o probibition. Prohibition does not close, but creates saloous, which every person can learn by passing through Towa. I would advise the people of this state to vote against prohibi- tion.! Rev. P. A. Hendrichson, Omaha, writes: I am of the opinion that the Slo. cumb law tends to diminish the vice of drunkenness. I am opposed to nnumendmont prohibiting the manufacture and sale of li quor, as I consider it an absidgment of man's personal rights. Should probibition he adop- ted iv would increase thelvice of drunkenness creatse hyvocrites, and tempts even law-abi ding citizens to become tresspassers, 1 would advise the people to vote against pro- hibition." Rev. P. Schultz, Martinsburg, Neb., writes: “Tam convinced that the Slocomb law tends to decrease drunkenness. Yet in country towns it should be move rigidly.enforced, 1 believe as a community we ave the most sober Implu in the union. . 'he people with whom am associated are .,{,,m«-.l 10 the constitu- tioual amendment and will continue to op- pose it as long as we are able to contend against it, with heart, mouth, pen and hunds, Christians are admonished, ‘Let no man jadge you in meat “or in drink’ I most ‘certafuly * regard the enfor ment of prohibition tan abriagment of the inalienable rights of man. Prohibi- tion incaeases drinking dvunkenuess, hypo- | crisy ana ull vices. What is worse, it con- demins Christ, our Lord's, conduct and s human opinion on a par with the bfble, Y above it, and thus undermines the authority of holy writ. To Chviktians 1 would say | Vote by all means againstit if you love your Lord and do not wanut to have His word set aside. To others I would 'say: If you love the union and its glorioas " liberty-frought constitution; if you love your own state and its welfave: if you love gersonal rights, vote | against prohibition.’! | Rov. J. C. Mueller, Norfoik, Neb., writes : know it 10 be a fact frdin personal observa- tion that the Slocumb law tends to diminish the evils of drinking. 1 would not approve of & constitutional amendment prohibiting the sale of liquor, as I eértainly think a wan | has a right to cat'and drink moderately what | he pleases and his cireumstances permit. | The result of the adoption of prohibition would be bad. 'The woderate or harmless | use will be restrained. The drunkard will drink by the pint instead of the glass, Traus- i gression of and contempt for our laws, sucuk- its, | to vote writes the Neb., writes: | Battle Law, if enfor ninish dray wen- . Neb,, is i Neb, Slo 1 would not amendment Neb., fng spylsm the prosperi 1 would vote Rov. G, ment, carry the sa would tuke i Towa and K of Nebraska to vote against prohibition every time," Rev H wr 41§ tends to dim! as any law ¢ constitution ufacture I conger not intend. ¢ Josus Christ fore reg an abridime man. 1 thin law thore w 4s now perjury, oat anybody cou hotror.” Go body to vote ing el be neee Roy all right. T clated are of sy C. ment prohibiting the sl I. Suchan UPON & man's perso chance to observe prohibition, therefore I do ult nybody should vote for pro- | likewiso not know in never say th hibition."* Rev. ( op diminish ap; manding pro ol-gri B¢ th twould create lying, false swearing, | just liw it would not be vespected novo isy, d drunkenicss advise the p prohibition.’ Rev. . H “lam satisf good one and tc of us here i that it is a m rights of ma adopted the present wed the « ‘tion a writes ove of a constitutional NOVEMBER 1 and hy erisy ty of ¢ will o of prohibition, as I inf Should the loon would go and 13 plac ANSAs I would advis Donuenfeldt, Taw believe that the inish drunkenness an doit. T do not Al amendment N roand | vote agai )1 liqu cgation wil v pretend . the son of forcement of the inalicnab if prohibitic 11 be just as mn tthat W h-breaking 1 1save us! wzninst pr L at every nt of K that and look at without hibition Wiedevanders, ( 1 thiuk high lic he people With w f liquor in opinio 1 1iborty ST, what it would ok, Deshlor, Neb o[ drankenne A hibition, as it infrin vights of man v vice lisobedience of th worse than befol e of the state to v elmreich, Lodge jed that the Slocus ds to diminish dr uzainst prohibitio casure which infring n. Shoutd the am result woull be wo against prohibition.” Rev. I the Slo B the people w prove of a col iting the ma consider suel of man's rights, umhb enough one for any one. Grand sl is enforced Neither ith whom Iam ass nstitutional smendme wfacture or sule of 1i La proposition an_al Should prohibi unhler, law forced it would not prevent the hol to get dru aginesicknes; as well as people of measure,’ Rev. J. Kippell, Osceola, Nev,, writes am in favor constitutional manufacture the enfor ment of mai would be far vice to the inst it." K. John, Wayne, Neb,, writes: no means W prohibiting 1 quor, as I fe an infringement on firmly believe that hibitory ame Worse prohibition.” Rev. O. [ “1 am of the ishes drunk therewith me do, i prohibition othey Hars ang would vote ik but many 5 und bocou hypocrites, 1 braska to of high license amendment pri and sale of liquor, nt of probibition a s rights, and worse than it now i people of the state uld 1 vote foran he manufacture ang 21 that such 4 me: my God-giv the udoption sadment would male Ladvise everybody to vols u Luscher, Ohiowa, N rohibiting know that my nst it I do ¥ better than o, wiis, and there 1 would advise L wit n of the Siocumb faw is that it ¢ Pole, hibiting state will be impaired. ndvise the g aguinst present laws far better Weller, Marysville, “I would not_vote for the prohibitory amend- s 1 believe it to be an the rights of & man Nebraska t consider ou: Neb,, writes ringment ndmen the drug store just as has been done in o the peopl ronce, Nob, Slocunib law ust Appe the hibition lo right i beeor 08 4 b drankenness then would Iive moro by pocrisy tha shuddor ov vory at the com ection if it should tothenbirg ouse works 11 i usso. nal muend y and soan; n, infri I never had n 1 woul “My \ds t s. 1 donot ndment de s 1poi the Should it v law and v 1 would ote against writes b law is inking, All as we foel s upon the tment b 50 that at 1 would advise the people to vote | would not be respe writes it is a wood myself selated ap. t prohib QUOT, 1S W bridgement tion be en ves of aleo s might im d perjurers advise the st “ 1 against a 1 I consider 1 infringe believe the rosult s, My is to “By nmendment 1 sale of i ure would be 0 rights, | of the pro- the evils tinst )., writes opinion that high license dimin the evils hibition nmuess or ore than a pi law is u great vil too, associated law would As I have lived in Kansas Tean say that I would | er vote fora probibitory amendment, as usider the enforcement of prohibition an abridgment of the rights of man amendment c better, but fo a W L can see no cha orse. A great Should the ance for the many men would drink morc on account of being com pelled to purchase liquor in large quantities. My ndvice'is to-vote affainst prohibition.” Itev. W. Chaleher, Deshler, Neb., writes: “Yes, sir, in my opinion the Slocumb law does tend to diminish drunkenness and the evils assocint ed therewith, I do not think a prohibitory amendment forbidding the manu sale of liquor would meet the facture and apnroval of ment of prohy personal rights of man. tory amendm of the state t Rev. S, Rademache My persona clude that th enness and ¢ amendment would not meet the appro the people w ard the enforcement of prohibition igomene of the inalienable rights of man, abri people. ibition an I regard t In case t cnt is adopted by our p results would be lying, false swearin risy, disobedience” of ness, and I would the laws, fore advise 0 vote against it, , Bennett, N I observations lead e Slocumb law dir pther vices; that a vith whom 1 am abridgement move nisk he enforee of the Ne prohibi ple the tiynoc druitken the people eb.,writes we to con drunk prohibitory ana I would advise the people to vote against it, us I shall ¢ Rev. I, 10" H. Dah), Lincoln, Neb,, writes: *1 am of the opinioa that the Slocumb law tends to dimmish drunkenness and the attendant evils, A constitutional amendment prohinit ing the manufacture and sale of liguor would not meet the approval of the people T sociated with force) the rights of tion from the many places man, and a cl Slocumb for the worse. 1ge vote against the amendment.’ Rev, H. Me rissler, Columbus, am as- 1 do, indeed, regard the cn utof prohibition an abridgement of to probibi- law would result in 1 would advise a b., writes “Iam of the opinion, and I believe that the so-called Sl the very lette saloon “syste amendment would the appro vith, 11 ble rights of cumb oy, m. law, if it be sufiicient rogulat The proposed not, by any n of the people [ enforced to jonof the prohibitor 1eans, mect i associ wd the enforcement of prohibi- tion as much an abridgement of the inalie s 1t would be to fo A person to drink_intoxicants who, by personal option, would abstain from drinkin know of o ¢l result from amendment. and tr) 10 destr ahove all hange for the better the adoption of a Wherever it has be From a political, them. 1 ! could prohibitc on adopte’ it has increased the vices it aimed social, religious standpoint, I could only, und and do only, advise the peopld of this state to vote etion. Rev., 1gail w. 1st prohibition at t Zabel, Orleans, Neb., he coming writes “TPhe Slocumb law does tend to diminish the vice of drunk constitutiona! kenness and other ev I amendment proln and the ils, biting sale of liquor would not meet the approval of my people hibition an rights of man, and I shall advise my abridgement of the I regard the euforcement of pro inalienab! people to vote against the proposed amendment Rev. A. Bergh, Hooper, Neb., writes: constitutional manufacture amendiment and sale of liquor A prohibiting the would not meet the approval of the people I an asso- ciated with, adoption, 1 tiao people Rov. H “I am J. agal sam wr 'l ated do n amendment hioition rights ot man amendment would promote hypocrisy. ple e T. Me Jossiblo for any liw, tho Slo to do 50" nor my own will vote agal Hubert, McCook, Ne ust probibition; ' T H. Becke 1o people with whom ot approve of @ they and I regard en Falls ( 15 the adoption of gainst it obius, Ne ) vote unt approval changes for the better could come st it and 1 advise No from its b., writes: shall lity, Neb,, I am asso- prohibitory forced pr ) abridgement of the malienable the proposed Iad As does ) law iminish drunkenness and the evils associ; ted with it not meet the reasous, one of which is tho abridg right, it perso hypocrisy it and shall use Rev, I\, writes: 'S¢ extends as t believe that and for that amendment ¢ the spects, 1 sh others to do Rtev. F. D 1L s my law a3 enfc drunkenness tional amendment prohibiting the sale of in- *S not meet toxicants or the approval assoclated status of the H approval would injure our glorious state in many candid The proposed amen approval of my peop) would work would instigate. I o all influes Johu, » far as my personal ) the Slocimb Ly, it does diminish dr reason the proposed loes not meet i, of my peopl all vote likewis uryer gaiust it, Kearne opinion in this s other ¢ th ced and te de ils their manufucture of the people with It would a people, aud it should anoths am against it | Island, observation it leads me to Neb. t the ut lo for many of Neb. unkenness, prohibition | I approval, nor Tty adoption und advise writes Slocum s diminish A constitu whom I am idge the inalienable rights of mau, it would make worse the moral (the pro ve of i s advise pe the | an | vote against it, and I advise all voters to do the | does the | , | miliar with 1 amendment) be defeated against it Rev. E. Moockle, Cedar Rapids, Neb, ¢ | writes: “Lam of the opinion that the Sio cumb Jaw tends to diminish drunicenness and the evils associated with it A amendment probibiting the manufactur salo of liquor would not moeet the approy t | the people with whom [am assoclat should rogard the enforcoment of prohibition an abridgoment of wble rights of wan. 1 the amenduen Rev. J writes: 1 dot has a tondency v | it should bo ¢ Ishall ad- and of the inalie Kulhurst Wk our pr to diminish drankenness, but reed with more enc A itutional prohibitory amend would meet my approval, ior the approval of with whom 1 am associated. Its ald work a cha e for thy Orso sading to hypoerisy and the e By 4 0 | e the ad oy n prion w loss of means sonal und religions libe vty dinst it Codar 1l my 1 Should prol ple 1o v f ey, A, Lenthaenset A ‘A coustituti 1 ient would not meet pproval of my p | ard th abridgement would w It | the b N Bluf's, M porsonal rights iz for the worse nzuinst it with all carne W. L Rudolph, Linds: “I think the pr WeADOLL oss inst t viee of drunke tlonal prohivitory amendment w any weans, meet my approve 1| parls The i amenament would mak crites, inaugurate thy tem and increase taxation 1| shall vote against it and advise others to of an woption its Ay vuld not, by nor that of my cat iy pe t Kind ofa spy svs Believin so 1 W v. H. Brandt, Stanton, Neb., writes | “Yes: wherever and whenever enforced the » | Siocumb law tends to diminish draukenness il consequently associated ovils, on stitutional amendment prohibiting the sale and manufacture of liquor if adopted would re | sult in changes for the worse, Being an un yod would for weet my approval with whorm'T ai asso it could not be enforced, It increase crime and liwle posed nmendment does ne nor that of the peop! ciated. 1 shall advise against it. Rov. J. Wittig, South Auburn, Neb writes 2 1do think our Slocamb law tonds to diminish drankenness. 1 am op. posed to prohibition for I think it would work changes for the worse. 1t would be an | abriagment of porsonal rights and the law ted. 1 carnestly advis against it | Rev. J. M. Johnunes | writes: “A constitutional am hibiting the sule of liquors. or thei | ture, would not mect my approval nor that of | & majority of my people, who would regardits enforcement an abridginent of the personal rights of man, [ advise people to vote st it Rov. 1 “My ns | high licensoas a v | ance is the proper lack, Scribner, Neb., writes lead me’ to believe that apon against intemper hig, and & constitutional | amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liquor would not meet the approval of | 0 majority of the people of this county. I am | opposed toits T believe it to be, when on | forced, an abridgement of personal rights. In Kausas they have plenty of frec plenty of hypocrisy, plenty of por ¥, 80 1 cannot see how auy good could it from the adoption of the proposed \dment, but I ean see how havi and de bused morals could ensue. CORRUPTED KANSAS MORALS, Enactment of T Drawback t Rev. B. Muller, Lin I “The morals of the com side have neitl been ele | by the prohibitory luws, They have im | peded the dey nent of thé eounty to considerable extent, and our people vote for repealing thom. As to myself, in favor of repealing the laws and sul high license, but not in tion Rev. . Vetter, Atchison, Kas., write In this community morals have not heen Svated norimproved by the prohibitory laws; | instead, they have materially impeded the velopmént of this city aud county. A large | majority of my frionds and wcquaintances would vote for the repeal of the laws. Ium for substituting hih-ticense luws.” Rov. G Polack, Bromen, Kan., writes “The morals of 1ny community have not been clevated, on the' cont the liquors that are now kept in homes has rather lowered th wmorals of our people. Ths material devel ment of this (Mavshall) county is ¢ bly less than the adjoining county (Gag braska, and it has improved but little sing 1885, the year when an attempt was fivst made to enforce the prohibition law. A proposition to repeal it would bo voted for by almost every one with whom 1 acquainted, 1 would favor high license and a strict super vision of suloons, interdicting the s of adul ted liquors August Hering, Elmwood, 5: “By no means have the prohibitory laws of Kansas improved tha morals of this community. Drunkards of old are drankards still in ~ spite of prohibition, while conutless immoral, unlawful things are [the fruits of prombition. Proni bition 15 and has been an impediment to the material development of town and count and the majority of the people would, with out a doubt, vote to vepeal it, 1 ways he ¢s will be opposed to prohibi laws, bec are unjust, absurd and tyraunical, Wherever established, pro hibition shouid be vepealed. High license, with strict but just penaitics, will do more to enecle drunkonness than prohibition ever did. Probibition s a failure in every respect.”? . ftov. R. Ludwie, Bern, Kan., “The morals of this comimuuity been elevated nor improved by the ¢ Taws of this state, and they the development of th Our people, & majority in favor of repealing them . Meyer, Oakley, Kan., writes “During my stay in this town, and from my frequent visits to ail the surrounding counties, T am forced to say that the morals of the people have not been improved nor elovated by the prohibition laws, On the contrary, I am convinced by stubborn facts that prohibition Las caused bad movals, viz: perjury, hypocrisy, ete., and by no means has it abolished drankenness The material development of this county has certainly been impoeded by prohibition, be- use other states reap the hurvest which is due tous, If the money which 1 to import liquor into thesa “western towns and counties from other states remained her would be a great aid to the people, who aréin debt aud are burdened with high taxation umbers of people have left the stato 1 more are going. 1 am inclined to the ovinion that a majority of my people wouid vote for resubmission and vepeal. I am for ropealing prohioition, because 1 think its repeal would benefit my county and my peopl Rev. K. Ehrbardt, Strong City, Kan., writes: *No, not by the prohibitory laws have the morals of this ymmunity been elevated or improved. There are as many crimes committed here as in towns of other states where liconse laws exist, and the p Bibitay laws have been provocative of hyp visy and falsehood, Prohibition has impeded rather than assisted the material development of thetown and county, consequentl people would vote for a repeal of the la far as my acquaintance goes. 1 favor n high license law and am opposed to prohibitior Rev. J. M, Hohn of Lincoln, Kan., writes: “3rom prohibition the morals of this con; ity have not been improved to any great ent! The probibitory laws have imp the material developinent of the county, which has been assisted somewhat by good crops. 1 know that o majority of the people whose views I am acquainted with would vote to 1lu'.|l prohibition, T am for high li- COnse na its enforcement,” Rev. J. Klingman, Avgentine, Kan,,writes | **In my opinion prohibition has ey ated any one's morals, I canuot say that the devel- opinent of this town has been ereatly impe by prohibition, since prohibition does not pro- hibit; the whisky ‘joints' are numerous. A majority of the psople whose views I um fa would vote for a repeal of the law. Iam in favor of high license and think van'..»um_\ way the liguor trade can be con- trodled,” v, H. Bode, Wameyo, Kus., writes: ©1 am a new-comer heve, therefore 1 cannot say as to the effect of probibition on the morals of the co unity. I'he people | have become » | acquainted with would all vote agiingt pre | hibition, as I would myself. 1 favor high 1i cense, but not local option ) | nev. C. H. Gracbuer, Topeka, Kas., writes “You ask if the movals of tis commuuity - | have been improved ov elevated by prohibl tion, and I answ, decidedly not. As toits effect in other aire 1 can unhesitating- n | ly say that it has not ouly impeded the mas terial development of county sud town, but the state generally. It has cectainly caused luw tide of immigration, ulsv the tide of hibition the Churceh, ville, Kas., writes unity in which I re ated nor improve: uld I am nitting favor of local op Kan., writes have not prohibi have im town and of them, | | tions, mavu facturing indus‘ rics, to turn away fro this state, That the prohibitory laws do n assist in the dovelopment of untry 4 dent, and my people wonld cast thet s for the repoal of protibition, 1 favep nd am opposed to prohibition,) Rev, O, R Kaiser, dunction City, Kan.,, writes: “Not_according to my vationg have the prohibitory Jaws improved or cles | vated the f this community. The s and lunatie asylums aro as full as boforey and other vieas —opium oating prostitu- tion - have taken, many insta the vlace of ox Kking. Lam fully cong vinced development would ba 100 if it hud not boe che Most of the peopld wl Vi have been exe prossed to mo wou Al tho laws, Ihe resubmissionists gaining ground | every day on s, substle tute high 1 t locul ope tion - for pr i course ‘V‘\l‘ will wclally and moraily ibition nourishes hy pode risy and inculeates a dise ard for Rov, H. Voss, Harnen, Kas., writos: “The prohibitory laws of th Ao have not ime proved of elevated the m tho come munity; on the contrary nanutace and s fors bidden, ity seeny the more detor them d to be more groo dy il pment of of this towr boen impaded by tho laws farmors and wealthy busi exprossed to me theiv dutermi state if the AWS are not soon repaaled. A nembers ot chureh in It Sodgwick aud | Kingman counties wou for wing prohivition without an excention, I am against deunkenness: it is a teerible sing wo tolerate no dringers in our chiwches, but T am absolutely azainst prohibition bec [} fost the word O 110 Rov. H. O Sonuc Mo morals of this community ns bean elavated by t fact the material deve nat of the county has been imvoded to the extent of many thousands, Should a proposition to repeal the present law be submitted to the people toey would nearly all vote aguinsg prolibition, My personnl disposition in the mattoris to vepeal prohibition und take up high licen: tov. 1. A, Frose, Palmer, Kan,, writess “The morals of this community have not been improved or elevated by the pronibitory o 1 think the muteriay laws of the state, nov opment of the county has been assisted them, A great majority of my peopld 1d vote to repeal the Law if thoy coiild so, sainst a prohibitory law I largor cod by prohibit 1vol v s e of intoxica nined to have The vial and connty have Muny resprete n hayve it th the 1o 10, have by no hivitory laws, and for Moftor, Mazratoa, have not advane I fact it achings of God. The majority of the plo whom T know will voto for repealin law and in favor of high ii Rev. J. H. Rischior, Heplor, Kas.. You ask if the moralf of this com have beon elevated or improved under pro- hibition; not that I Kknow unle: vasion of the 1aw und hypocrisy multiplied can be called improvement of Ihe majc ity of the people whom 1 know would vote to vopeal the law. 1 i5 an unwise and unjust taw and should be vepealed. 1t cannot be ¢ oreed, fev. J. H. Hoyer, Hanover, Kan., writes: I have rosided in Hanover but two years, though I have vesided in Kansus nine years and [ have not experienced that the morats of the peopie have been improved by the pros Libitory laws. A majority of the people whose political view T am acquainted wiih would vote to repeul the luw. Personaliy & am in favor of high license and local optivn, and in cases of scandalousidrank: puni ment of the drankard and the saloon keey Rev. J. C. Kellor, Palner, Kan., writes No, siry the movals of this comnunity have not been clevated or improved by prohibitio, and the development of the county s beom fmpeded by the laws. Tain favor of repeale ing prohibition and substituting nigh licen o, as area great majority of the people whe L acquainted with Rev. O. Mencke, ston, Kan., writes, and his views are Horsc by 1 12, Doegs muller, of the same city: +No, morals have not been improved: on the coutrary they have peen lowered instoud of elevated by the pros Nibitory laws, and the same laws have i peded the matcrial developiient of the town and county in which Ulive. If a proposition Ta, w wr e Hevin to repeal the laws was submitted 1o the peos plo o majority of those who 1 Kuow walldeessss vote to repedl. law."! Rov Droegemulier, writes " morals of which T reside nave not beon inproved, On the contravy, they have been badly impaived the proliibitory laws forbidding the manas ctare and sale of intoxicating liquors. The material development of my county has been impeded by prohibit ALl people with, whose views Tam acquuinted would voto foe a l of the law. | am weainst prohibition aud local option. 1 believe in high liconsey Laws will never cure deankards,”? SOUTH DAKOTA SENTIMENT, Moral and Ma fal War eded by Pro‘uabitic Motz of Gratan, S, D., writest s of this community have not since the probibitory laws sd: on the contrary, they have becor orse. As to the material de velopment of the county, it is going down grado under prohibition. ~ Most of the people T'am acquainted with ave in favor of repeals ng the law, as [ myself.” Rov. R. Avnstein of Ferney, 8, D., writest “The morals of this community not ims proved under prohibition, and it is questiony ableif the 1 of the laws have fmpeded in the aevelopment of the county ple would vote for its vep probably think it has inpeded prog development. 1 am in favor of u hizh license law. Prohibition is u great humbug and makes hypocrites,” Rev. H. Hamerman of Pukw writc “Phe morals of 1 have not been improved in the prohibitory luws, — Th the developiient of ‘the cou are leaving the countr tunity they would vot law. I am fora licen: penalty for drunkavds. Y Rev. A, Ttraner of Freeman, 8. 0., writest “No, not at all, have the morals of the come munity in which I live been improved or ele- vated by the prohibitory laws, neithor huve they assisted in the development of the coane ty.” The majority of the peaple whose per sonal views | am acquainted with would vote for the repeal of prohibition. Lam in favor of a high license and local option law Rev, George Fisher, of Millar. wri he prohibitory laws of this state have not improved the morals of this com- wunity, While I eannot say they have ime peded development, they certainly have not assisted in that diveetion. Most of the peos ple 1 know would vote for repe: the | Pevsonally T favor high license IRev. AL K. Mundt, Kileadale, Dak., writes: “No, there is no difference noticeanlo us to mordl inprovement sinee prohibition, but it is noticeable that the law has impeded the material elopment of the country, and ty of our people would vote to law. An oath should be asacred nn afirmation, but probibition makes 5 and hypocriues, . A, H. Kurtz, Dakota, writes: “Dronk- ards ave still numerous, Ly pocrites have mul- tiplied and disvespect of law has inereased, 50 it is eusy to note that the morals of the commuuity have not heen elevated nor ime proved under prohibition, while it has doubtedly been th of checking the im- ) the state, In the material de Most of my Lam 1 favor of a high license Herington, Kan., the connmunity in Rev. . C o, the mo been improved have been enfor ua, S. D., connnunity msequence of awve impeded nd people 1T given an oppor- for tho repeal of the law with a poeuniary N, that respect it has impeded velopment of the people would vote to v helaw. 1 donot Dolibve in- abridging te mights of all thoh people because some of them ave drunkir Lam opposed to prohibition.” Rev. (i Protratz, Hillsbora, Dal “‘Morals have neither been elevated proved; on the contvary, prohibitio much hiarm to thepeople, Drunk been increased; hypocvicy and law have been added to the sins and short- eomings of the people. 1t is not noticeabl that the material developmout of mmu? affected in any way by the prohibis prohibited drinks can be pre cured just veadily us ever, however the voice of the people 15 ‘emigration’ if the law i d. They would all vote for ite n disposed favorably toward nse and strongly opposed o prohis bition und shall advise agaiust it Rov. k. (i, Stark, Stone Falls, S, D., writes: “Have the movals of this community been im proved! No, they have been degraded since the people could not get drinks openly they got them secretly, Not to say suything of Inereased taxation, the clesing of in ness houses attest that prohibition yoded the material development of th 1y people would vote against prohibition if portunity wiss given them. 1 advise all who prize liberty and good warals W e against prohibition iu wny form.” writes; nor fine hus done niess has contempt ot high li