OCR Text |
Show Prohibition Doomed By L. A. Hollenbeck i Twenty nine states have already voted against prohibition, and only 36 states are necessary to accomplish accom-plish repeal. Texas, Maine, Georgia Geo-rgia and Oregon, were counted on . to stop the march for repeal, and they all fell in line. Virginia vo-I vo-I tes soon and it will close on the I 7th of November when Ohio, Pen- nsylvania and Utah cast their votes. Prohibition should never occurred in this country. It is op- posed to sound logic. The point is, that you cannot prohibit anything any-thing where there is a difference of opinion as to the right or wrong of that thing. A crime that every body admits is a crime, like murder, mur-der, larceny, burglary and robbery can be and is prohibited because there is no difference of opinion. jEvrybody agrees But, in trying to prohibit the usee of intoxicants there is a sharp disagreement not only between the people generally but between doctors and scientific men. Besides people are determined deter-mined to have their appetites satisfied sat-isfied to a reasonable extent, and if their liquors are properly regulated, re-gulated, they will grow to be temperate tem-perate instead of intemperate, as the case is under prohibition. Prohibitionists Pro-hibitionists are always talking in favor of temperance, and as to that we all agree. All sound and sensible men want temperance, but prohibition is not temperance at all. It is intemperance of thought, of policy, of action, and of tolerance; toler-ance; and breeds bootlegging and disrespect of law. The history of prohibition proves it by a multlp. licity of evidence. We see it by the guard on the international boundry lines, the anti-booze fleet on the Atlantic coast, the corruption corrupt-ion of officials, the running of blockades, the multiplicity of moonshiners and the home brew In families all over the land, as well as the Immense revenue going go-ing to law breakers instead of flowing into the treasury of the United States as well as in the local treasuries of the several states. But remember to vote not' only for the 21st amendment but also, to vote against state prohibition prohib-ition at the same time and by separate ballots on the 7th day of November. (This Column Cont. on Pago 4.) OTHERS VIEWS (Continued from page one) A COMEBACK TO i A MERCHANT (Continued from last week) Remember Mr. Merchant that when you became mayor of Duchesne Du-chesne City you too signd an oath to uphold and support the con. stitution of hte United States and of the State of Utah, and I I wonder if you who are now rail-l rail-l ing against the dishonesty of county officers, have lived up to your oath one hundred percent? : or perchance you may also have made some mistakes along the line, speaking of the "disappearance "disappear-ance of books over night" I wish to state for the information of Mr. Merchant, that every record of the assessor's office that I have received during my administration admin-istration is in the office files, ' open to inspection of any tax payer in Duchesne county, Mr. ' Merchant included. Will you Mr. 1 Merchant grant this same privi- lege to your customers relative to : your tax sales account? If so, 1 please inform the writer of this 1 article who will gladly undertake the checking of these sales. The flagrant way in which "A Merchant" scandalized the present pres-ent deputy assessor's would only be used by one trying to protect their own tacts. If Mr. Merchant's information is reliable (the source of which is well known) relative to favor-itsm favor-itsm being shown to some by the county 'assessor, why not make some specific charges that the taxpayers may know who is being favored. The present county assessor would gladly welcome this information. While I plead guilty to the fact that I have always al-ways gone the limit in trying to ease the burden of the taxpayer, I denounce the charge of favor-itsm favor-itsm as a deliberate falshood. J Other charges made in the arti.j cle signed by "A Merchant" are, so absurd that to consider themj would be folly and a waste of the; public's time in reading them. My first article was only intended in-tended for those who were violating vio-lating the law, those who are not need take no offense. No doubt in most cases the intent in-tent of the business men is to do the best they can under the cir-j cumstances but to collect in ex-j cess of. 2 percent on the sales tax j is a violation of the spirit and In-1 tent of the law. The principal is wrong, and is a dangerous precedent. JMo community, county or staie would tolerate such methods in the collecting of city, state and county taxes regardless of the emergency. C. W. SMITH |