They Explain Why Prohibition in that State Is a Dismal Failure IT IS DAMAGING TO BUSINESS i - Owing to the Blight of Prohibition, Im migration into Kansas in 24 Years Has Been Less Numerically than the Birth Bate. The Anti-Saloon League in state con vention at Hastings laid plans for con ducting a campaign in Nebraska. Res olutions were adopted declaring the league to be in favor of every meas ure looking to state-wide prohibition. The agents of the league were in structed to work for what they call “county option” (county prohibition) as the most practical means of attain ing state prohibition. A publication said to be the official organ of the Anti-Saloon League, in its issue of January, 1908, said: “Wo must have the county law to demons trate the value of prohibition in its larger division before we can hope to win the state.” Superintendent Palmer of the Anti-Saloon League in Minne sota, recently said: “We favor ultimate prohibition by the state, but county op tion is the natural step thereto.” Dr, P. A. Baker, national superintendent of the Anti-Saloon League, said: “State and national prohibition is the ulti mate object of the league.” The only active work being done in Nebraska today to attain state pro hibition is that performed by the active, paid agents of the Anti-Saloon League. They are traveling the state getting signers to petitions to the next legislature praying for a law pro viding for what they term “county op tion,” but which, in fact, is county prohibition—there being no element of option in it. These facts are not disputed. The action of the league is forcing the sup porters of the Slocumb local license law to take steps in its defense. This law has been on the books since 1887, and is regarded as the best law for the control of the liquor traffic ever written. Many rtates have copied it. Since the sole aim of the Anti Saloon League is to attain state-wide prohibition, it is necessary for the sup . porters of the Nebraska license law to ascertain the facts attending the operation of prohibition laws in other ' states. This is why the Merchants’ and Manufacturers’ association of Omaha has collected much informa tion on this point from so-called pro hibition states. Incident to this showing, the asso ciation has collected evidence from members of commercial clubs of Kansas, to which the following letter was sent, with request for opinions on the subject: “Today we received the following letter from an editor of the Kimball, Nebraska Observer: Gentlemen:—I came here over a year ago from Kansas, where I lived fifteen years. I had ample opportuni ty to observe the workings, or rather, the non-working qualities of the pro hibitor'- law. I am sick and tired of drug-store saloons and joints which pay no license and which cause more drunkenness than open saloons. The Slocumb law in Nebraska is all right as- it now stands, and needs no chang ing. A saloon run strictly in accord ance with this law is a great deal more to be desired than a ‘dry’ town with Its drug stores, its bootleggers, and its numerous shipments of mail order booze and consequent drunken ness.” The following replies were received: L. H. PHILLIPS, ATTORNEY. Girard, Kan., July 13, 1908. Mer chants’ and Manufacturers’ associa tion. Gentlemen—Replying to your favor of June 3d relative to the work ings of the Prohibitory Liquor Law, 1 will say that the way the matter is now handled, it amounts to almost a farce. This is largely due to the way the county and city officials handle the matter. In this county, I presume there are at least one hundred saloons. They run night and day, Sundays included. There has never been a time since the liquor law was enacted that it hasn’t been sold in this county. It is worse now than it was some years ago.— Very truly yours, L. H. Phillips. SOUTHERN KANSAS MILLERS’ COMMERCIAL CLUB. Wichita, Kan., July 6, 1908. Mer chants’ and Manufacturers’ associa tion. Gentlemen—Replying to your favor of the 29th as to the effect of the prohibition law in the state of Kansas and the city of Wichita, will say that there is no question but the law' as it haB been enforced in this city and other towns in Kansas has hurt the material and business interests of the state; however, if prohibition pro hibited as it is intended by the .law, results might be different, yet we have never had an opportunity to judge, as there seems to be just as much w'his key and beer sold at this time as ever there was, yet it is supposed the “lid Is on" in Wichita. While we have no open saloons in this city at this time, a large number of parties who for merly operated saloons opened up diug stores, and the only dlffrence that 1 can see is that they are not paying any revenue into the city, whereas when they were running open saloons they were paying the city quite a revenue. From a business standpoint, I have no doubt but what the city is more prosperous with open saloons; yet if the law should he enforced and prohi bition actually prohibited, we no doubt would be able to go ahead and build up tlie business interests of our city to some extent. Tlie trouble with prohibition in this state is that it does not prohibit. The town is full of drug stores, joints and dives, and the quality of the liquor is very inferior. Some day they may he able to make the law effective, yet af ter over twenty years' trial, I must say that it Is a failure as far as the cities and towns where the sentiment is largely in favor of open saloons. Of course in towns where the majority are in favor of prohibition, the traf fic lias been restricted to a large ex tent, but I -do not know of any town of any size in the state where whis key and beer cannot he bought in violation of the law, either through drug stores, joints, or bootleggers. I have always been in favor of local option and high license.—Yours truly, F. D. Stevens, Secretary. KANSAS STATE RETAIL MER CHANTS’ ASSOCIATION. Leavenworth, Kan., June 1, 1908. Merchants’ and Manufacturers’ asso ciation. Gentlemen—Answering your circular letter of May 29th with re ference to the Slocumb law and the experience of Kansas with prohibi tion, will say that the quotation from the letter of your Nebraska editor is concise, explanatory and eloquent as voicing the opinion of every Impartial citizen of Kansas that I have ever met. 1 think that it is safe to say that none but fanatics of the worst sort can find any virtue in the Kansas prohibition law’. Personally I desire to give your association and its purpose the stamp of my commendation, believing that there is no other interest quite so sensible that could be conserved. The enforcement of the prohibition laws in Kansas is like the pretended purifica tion of politics according to Ingalls,— "an iridescent dream,” If intoxicants are to be manufactured and sold, for heaven’s sake make the traffic pay its share of the public expense in actual cash rather than by penalizing the violation of the law and adding per petually to the cost of government. I think that were it not for the distaste ful notoriety which would attach, there are several clergymen in this city who would conscientiously sign this letter. —Very truly yours, H. A. Hose, Secre tary. FORT SCOTT COMMERCIAL CLUB. Fort Scott, Kan., May 30, 1908. Gentlemen—In answer to your letter of May 20th regarding the effect of prohibition, will say that your editorial Informant at Kimball, Nebraska, is en tirely correct. The writer has studied and seen the effects of the prohibitory law in Kansas since ils inauguration over twentv five years ago. At no time —the present included—has it been impossible to procure liquor, and that, generally speaking, of the very worst quality. The drunkards of ten years ago, if still alive, are the drunkards of today. If not alive, their placer have been taken by an army of new recruits. Kansas, with its natural re sources, is the most productive state in the Union, and yet. we have gained less in population than almost any other state—the increase of immigrant population in this state being less than the birth rate. The writer has seen more blackmailers, more perjur ers, and more dissension caused among good people by this same prohibitory law than from any other cause that may be named. The majority of our people in this locality fee] that it is an unjust law and that it has greatly hampered our progress and well-being. I sincerely hope that the merchants and solid business men of Nebraska will not. burden themselves with such a law. You may rest assured that if they do you may say good-bye to progress; at least, our experience is that way. About the only benefit the law has proven to us is to give a good advertising medium for sensational preachers, evangelists, and grafting politicians Furthermore, any rep resentative business man of any town in Kansas, if he speaks the truth, is bound to tell you the same thing. Should you find that I am able to as sist you in any way to further informa tion, please command me, and I will be only too willing to do all 1 can.—Yours truly, W. B. Sellgrave, Secretary. WINFIELD COMMERCIAL CLUB. Winfield, Kan., June 8, 1908. Gentle men—We acknowledge receipt of yours of the 29th. The ex-Kansan gives you about the correct informa tion as to the working of the prohibi tory law, yet we believe the drug stores and the joint proposition are better than the open saloons in Kan sas. The objection we had with open saloons in our town was that they occupied the mast prominent loca tions we had. While we believe that the rent values were higher here when they were running than they are at the present time, as a whole we do not believe the change affects the value of real estate.—Yours truly, Business Men’s association, O. H. Bevis, President. COFFEYVILLE CHAMBER OF COM MERCE. Coffeyville, Kan., June 1, 1908. Gen tlemen—This will acknowledge receipt of your favor of the 29th, addressed to the secretary of the Citizens’ Commer cial club, containing quotation re ceived from the editor of a paper it Kimball, Nebraska, relative to the effectiveness of the Kansas prohibi tory law. The letter as quoted, ns a general proposition, about covers the ground, and any opinion on tills sub ject will naturally be of a personal character. So far as the strict enforce ment in the state of Kansas In the larger towns Is concerned, I believe it is conceded to he an absolute fail ure; while in the rural towns It is said to lie effective. As a matter of fact, in this ritv some six years ago there were a number of first class saloons running wide open, paying a revenue to the city of from $5d to $100 per month. Tills had the effect of raising the rentals of business property to nn abnormally high point, hut had very little, If any, effect upon residence property. During the past two years there have been no saloons in tills city, but they were replaced 10 a considerable extent by drug stores starting up and securing liquor per mits under which liquors were dis pensed under the provision of the Druggists’ Permit haw,—the violations of whieli law became so numerous that it resulted In all druggists’ permits being revoked. The result of tilts con dition is, that the police court records show a very large per cent of drunk enness, and this is only attributable to one source—that of bootlegging. These conditions cause the writer to express an opinion that the prohibitory law is not effective in the cities; how ever, there has been no appreciable decrease In the rentals of business buildings. Not being familiar with the Slocumb law, I would he at a loss to venture an opinion regarding it. However, I believe tho consensus of opinion among the business fraternity here would favor the adoption of a local option law.—Very respectfully, J. P. Casey. HUTCHINSON COMMERCIAL CLUB. Hutchinson, Kan., June 2. 1908. Gen tiemen—I will reply to your circular letter of the 29th ultimo by giving you my personal views only. The writer was traveling over northern Kansas and southern Nebraska at the time those states adopted the present law applying to the liquor traffic, and he had a good chance to observe the workings of the two plans. In Lin coln, Nebraska, high license closed all but three places, and by requiring ad vance payment of the high license and the prohibition of screens at doors and windows, it did away with subterfuges and sneaking, in Kansas, on the oth er hand, the effecls of the law en couraged perjury and sneaking, and a general disregard of law. In my opinion, which has been confirmed by the test of lime, the Nebraska plan is the best, both as a true temperance measure and for its effects upon the morals of the people.—Yours truly, L. A. Beebe. A NEBRASKA OBSERVER. Kimball, Neb., May 29, 1908. Gen tlemen—The little town in which I lived in Kansas was what was termed a “wet” town. For many years we had two joints, operated under the fine levy system. Every month the marshal arrested the joint keepers, tor selling liquor illegally, and they paid a fine of $50 and costs per month. A preach er came along and put them out of business. After that there was rnoro drunkenness, and tile formerly good town became dead. The large number of farmers who formerly came to town went to other places. With the open saloon the “city dads,” of whom 1 was one, could control the sale of liquor, close the places on Sunday and at 11 o’clock p. m., and at any time regulate them and say who should not get liquor. After they were closed, the bootleggers got busy, and we never could in any ease lay our finger on the culprit. More than that, our streets soon showed the effects of cut ting off the license revenue—$1,200 a year. The city went in debt, and , 1908. Gentlemen— From personal Inquiry with the lead ing merchants of this city I learn they have had a very marked decrease of business since the beginning of tho dry year. They notice they are not getting tho trade of their old rural friends. A great many of our people are Incensed, and aro showing resent ment. There is tho usual underground way to drink which Is the result, of a dry town, and the express company Is doing a thriving business In pack ages which bear tho outward appear ance of the desired liquid.” A further Incentive for such organ* zatlon was tho development of the fact that the mail-order tralllc for wet goods and merchandise shipped Into Blair has increased enormously since that town adopted the dry policy last spring. On reliable authority It Is stated that, the number of post office money orders going to points outside of Nebraska has increased ilneo April first at a ratio of twenty five to one, and the express money orders Issued In Blair have increased in about the same proportion. All this, of course, Is apart from the largo num ber of orders pent by tho farmers of Washington county to catalogue houses- the greater number of these farmers declining to go to Blair to Irade except when it is absolutely necessary. The net result Is the out put. of a large amount of money every month which hitherto was spent, among the merchants of Blair, who of course must pay the same amount of taxes and rental rates ns formerly. In addition to (his state of things Is the forfeiture of $0,000 per annum in li cense money which must be made up by additional taxation—the burden falling upon tlie responsible property owners and business men of Blair. This comes at an Inopportune time to Blair, which Is now in debt several thous ands of dollars for current expenses, there being registered municipal war rants In the sum of $3,000, which, by the way,Is the first batch of registered warrants known to the municipal his tory of that town, since all claims against the city were previously paid promptly without the necessity of Is suing the city’s I. O. U’s in the shape of warrants. In view of these untoward facts, the merchants of Blair found it necessary to organize for concerted action in support of a movement the object of which is to secure relief from hurtful conditions which have never before obtained In that city. A RAID ON THE SCHOJL MONEY. Leading men of the Anti-Saloon League in Massachusetts confidently predict that the legislature will enact a law taking all revenues from li cense nut of the local school districts and transferring such funds to the state treasury. A circular, issued by the league in support of Its contention, quotes the decision of the Massachusetts supreme court, to-wit: "That while the question of grant ing licenses in any state or town is determined by the vote of the inhabi tants thereof, still, the license is grant ed by the state. Under this decision, thp license tax Is a state tax, and the license money Is the state’s money," etc. By the terms of this bill, license money now derived from the liquor traffic In wet towns would go Into the common fund, and be apportioned on the basis of population, alike to dry and wet towns. This would mean that the license money from wet towns would go to helj) maintain the schools of dry towns in Nebraska. The injustice of this scheme is so apparent that it need not bo dwelt up on. The only basis for the conten tion of the league in Massachusetts is the fact that such license fees are authorized by act of the legislature, as they are in Nebraska, and in that sense, the license fee may he regard ed ps a state tax. No doubt tbis movement of tho Anti Saloon League Is popular In tho rural districts where there are no saloons, and where schools must bo maintained. If such a law could bo enacted In Nebraska, It would, of course, compel the school districts In cities and towns where liquor Is sold under license to divide the money among school districts In the country where saloons do not exist. This scheme would have a peculiar channi to the rural voter, but it (len s not tnko much discernment to see that It would lilt the taxpayer of cities and towns squarely between the eyes. EBB TIDE OF SOUTHERN PRO HIBITION. It would seem that the strength of the prohibition movement In southern States had begun to wane. The revolt of the business men of Georgia against the provisions of the prohibitory taw which went Into effect In that state last January, owing to the consequent loss of bus* less, hail Its logical effect In the ng ntnntton of Joe Brown for governt/. It had Its effect upon tho voters of Florida, also. In the latter state, In June, the voters were forced by the Anti-Saloon League (o chooso between tho policy of local option and thnt of prohibition. Returns show tin' local-option party won by deerstvo majority. So It Is In Louisiana, where the Is sues were Identical with these In Flor ida, the legislature having voted down the bill for slate-wide prohibition and reaffirmed the faith of the people oC Louisiana In the policy of the license, local option system. No doubt tho’ decisive action of the Louisiana legia-’ lature was In a measure due to tha, fiasco in Oklahoma, where, ns every body knows, the people last year at the ballot box adopted the policy of. state-wide prohibition; but. like Georgia, Oklahoma discovered that the policy was Injurious to business and failed to keep liquor from th<» black mnn as it was Intended to do^ This Ik why Oklahoma discarded If and adopted the dispensary system, something like that, of South Carolina, which hns been partially successful In* keeping whiskey out of the hands ot the blacks, while at the same time per mitting the white men to get all the li quor they want. The auditor of tho South Carolina dispensary says In a recent letter thnt tho dispensary sys tem abolished the saloon at county, cross roads, thereby depriving tho black man of easy access to forty-rod whiskey The auditor says further thnt tlie dispensary does not not and never has lessened the total amount of liquor consumed In South Carolina. Tho latest and most Important failure of the prohibition policy In the South was that of Tennessee. The result whs most decisive. The Issue was joined by the leading men of the Htnto and made paramount in the recent campaign. The upshot of the whole movement throughout the South Is that the en lightenment which comes from actual experience Is educating the voters to a knowledge of the fact that the only practical m< ans for controlling the liquor traffic Is through the enactment of laws similar to the Klocumb license, local option law of Nebraska, said to bo the best law for the control of the liquor traffic ever written. HOW IT HIT MOBILE TAXPAYERS. The lust session of the Alabama leg islature enacted a law providing for state-wide prohibition, to take effect In January, 1909. It Is too soon, of course, to get facts showing whether or not the new law has injured busi ness or Impaired property values; but it. is not too soon to gather facts from Alabama showing that the taxpayer al ready feels the effect of the new poli cy. This Is shown by the following extract from a letter written by the secretary of the Mobile Chamber of Commerce, under date of June 11th, to the Merchants’ and Manufacturers’, as sociation at Omaha. It reads as fol laws; “By act of legislature long years ago, Mobile county was allowed to use the liquor licenses in support of her schools in exchange for government building sites. The first net of our legislature last year gave the right of local option, hut at the extra call of the legislature, state prohibition was forced through. This will leave tho school system of the county after tho first of January, 1909, with a large de ficit, and to make up this, a special vote was taken two weeks ago to pay, an additional tax of one mill, but tho voting returns show that the extra tax was lost; so thnt our school term must either be much shortened, or the sal aries of all teachers reduced below a Mvlng wage. This effect on our schools has caused more heartaches than anything else so far.” Note—If Nebraska ever adopts pro hibition, the salaries of school teach ers will be reduced all over the sfato and the term of school will be short ened for lack of funds, thus depriving children of needed instruction. FOR BETTER ENFORCEMENT. Hundreds of Business Men Have Joined the Merchants’ and Manufacturers’ Association Under the Following Conditions. "As business men and tux-payers wo favor the movement to form an Associa tion of Merchants and Manufacturers for tho purpose cf adopting measures to blind about n better enforcement of tho Sloeumb liquor Tie.n,.-.e law throughout the state—a law making It optional wlifj the people of a town or city to say whether or not liquor shall be sold. Wo believe tho said law has been of great benefit to tho state find that there can bo not better means for regulating the sal* if intoxicants. We stand for If* strict enforc 'ment. Wo Join this association with the understanding that no distil! r. In .Ver, liquor dealoi r * loon keeper Is eligible tu members! it object is to protect property ini' ■ from the 111 effects of unwise legislation.’’