THE OMAHA SUNDAY BEE: NOVEMBER 5, 1916. 13 A
POLITirAL ADVERTISEMENT. POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT. ' OLITIFAI, AnVEKTISRMENT. rOI.lTirAI. AOVEHTISEMENT. POLITICAL AI1VKKTISKMKNT. POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT. POLITICAI. ADVERTISEMENT.
Shoot Omaha's Prosperity and Financial Standing to
Pieces, Boys, We Have Nothing at Stake.
-Anti-Saloon League.
OOK Out for Roorbacks Now
This is about the usual time in the campaign for the Dry Committee to trot out its "Bogie Man" and rehash its line of pathetic "dope," with their colored misstatements and
garbled statistics from prohibition cities. We ask the citizens to beware.
We are reliably informed that the Dry Committee has taken exceptions to our advertisement in regard to the workings of prohibition in Council Bluffs, and they are at the pres
ent time in that city seeking statistics to refute our arguments as to the comparison between the number of arrests for drunkenness in Omaha and Council Bluffs. We defy them to
do so.
TAXES:
It seems that in all prohibition campaigns, that those who have the least at stake are usually the leaders for the prohibition cause. Of course, in Omaha, it is a little different,
but in order that you may be informeid we shall publish for your information a comparison of the amount of taxes paid by our prohibition friends and the amount that is paid by some
who are against a destructive and high-tax policy for Omaha. ' v
Ttie Deadly Parallel:
Names and amount of taxes paid by tho$e who Names and amounts of taxes paid by those who
advocate prohibition: ' favor license:
Lothrop, C. E Owns no property Brandeis, Walter Pays $1,368.96 taxes
- ' ;. Perley, L. O. . . . Owns no property McCaffrey, Owen Pays $1,433.77 taxes '
Reynolds, E. M. Owns no property Storz Brewing Co Pays $5,098.88 taxes '
Clark, F. E.. ; ; ".Owns no property , Krug Brewing Co Pays $4,593.95 taxes
: Cloyd, A. P.. : Owns no property Miller, Rome Pays $5,705.85 taxes '
1. Bennett, M. V. Owns no property Paxton Hotel Pays $7,397.26 taxes , :,
' ' Crowell, C. C. Jr Owns no property O'Brien, Thomas ... Pays $ 980.00 taxes "
Cunningham, & D. , Owns no property
Thomas, Elmer E, Z Pay. $ 87.30 taxes Ucenw Tota1' ' ...$26,587.67
Graham, W.T.Vr:..if:.. .Pays $584.74 taxes V ' '
Harrison, C. F..T. . . .............. .. . Pays $ 83.33 taxes ;
Morrow, E. T. Pays $ 11.90 taxes
LOWE, TITUS Pays $ 8.04 taxes
Dry Total. .; ; . . . : .$775.31
no taxes
"Shoot Omaha's prosperity and financial standing to pieces,, boys, we have nothing at stake. Raise the taxes to the limit, we don't care." Eight of our Dry Committee pay' '
whatever, and five pay the small amount of $775.3 1 , as compared to the $26,587.67 paid by those who are opposed to prohibition.
If some of those who are in favor of prohibition had a tax of from $5,000.00 to $7,000.00 to pay each year, they would not be so anxious for a 25 per cent increase in tax
rate, and perhaps an increase in valuation at the same time, such as they have in Council Bluffs today.
'
Our statistics from Council Bluffs were authentic and we challenge the Dry Committee to deny them. We also challenge them to show that they have not received contribu
tions from the merchants across the river. On Sunday last, Mr. Thomas of the Dry Committee informed one of our men, over the phone, that the contributions for the Dry Campaign Fund
were coming in so fast from across the river that it was impossible for the Dry Committee to find time to acknowledge receipt of these contributions.
Why these contributions from the merchants across the river?
Can it be that they feel the trade slipping from them? . -
The Drys may shout from every rostrum in Omaha and use every means of publicity available, but they will never change the fact that five out of every ten automobiles that
are parked on the down-town streets of Omaha bear the Iowa license tag. Any sane, fair-minded, level-headed resident of Omaha can readily see that at the present time we are enjoying
more trade from the state of Iowa than we did before Iowa adopted prohibition. Our automobile argument will surely bear us out in this contention.
Fellow merchants, professional men, laboring men and citizens of Omaha, the proof of our statement in regard to Iowa rests with the Iowa license taf
Will You Sanction a Destructive Policy ?
. . . . . . . . . . . .
In previous paragraphs in this article, and in previous publicity matter we have cited the citizens of Omaha to the fact that they are enjoying the trade that the Iowa merchants
formerly had before adopting prohibition. Can you, Mr. Merchant with this glaring example staring you in the face, support a destructive policy, such as the prohibitionists are en
deavoring to thrust upon the citizens of Omaha?
You know that men love liberty. You know that if this city adopts prohibition that the cattle men from the West will not bring their stock to this market, but will go to a city
where they can enjoy the liberty which prohibitionists wish to deny them here. This is no idle talk, it is a commonsense argument. The trade that you are enjoying at present from
the state of Nebraska and the state of Iowa (which you have gained in the last nine months), will be diverted to other cities should prohibition go into effect.
It is a well known fact that the horse of the farmer who lives half way between a licensed town and a prohibition town knows which way to turn just as soon as he leaves the barn
yard gate. If you are not aware of this statement, ask the merchants. The above is the sole reason for the merchants of Council Bluffs contributing to the Dry Campaign.
In this article we are not appealing to your EMOTIONS, but to your good, sound judgment. ...,
We Ask You to Think It Over