Home and State (Dallas, Tex.), Vol. 15, No. 13, Ed. 1 Saturday, October 18, 1913 Page: 2 of 16
sixteen pages : ill. ; page 16 x 12 in. Scanned from physical pages.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
2
October 18, 1913.
Act Only for the Cause
I
1
I
I
A
4
BETTER THROUGH WOMEN’S VOTES.
T IS NOW TWO YEARS since the women of
California were enfranchised. Says the “Home
Alliance’’ of Woodland:
SENATOR LEA ANSWERS CRITICS.
Editor Home and State:
By A. W. Walker.
AM HEARTILY in favor of the suggestion that
the Democratic-Progressive-Prohibition forces
of Texas hold an elimination primary for the
BEG TO ACKNOWLEDGE receipt of your favor
of the 24th, and to thank you for giving me
an opportunity to correct the injustice that
HOME AND STATE
NAUGHTY, NAUGHTY PROHIBITIONISTS!
C TATE SENATOR McGregor made a speech at
• Llano the other day in which he was quoted,
substantially, as saying that the wicked Pro-
hibition Democrats are responsible for the pres-
ent muddle in the business of the State.
This kind of talk made a big hit with the Aus-
tin Statesman, which says:
“He referred, for instance, to the fact that
cants. The evident hope is that when the day
of reckoning arrives, the brewers, with a direct
plea that they are not responsible for the evils
attributed to whiskey, may escape, for a time
at least, the doom which they recognize as in-
evitable for their long-time comrades, the dis-
tillers. —----------------
brewers knife DISTILLERS.
{T 7 HEN THIEVES fall out, honest men get
V V their due,” says the old saw. With the
prospect that brewers and distillers, age-
long allies for defense against the forces of re-
form, have about come to the parting of the ways,
those who have worked and fought and prayed
through the long years for the abolition of the
liquor traffic should take heart of renewed hope.
This is the situation. Months ago, the brewers
began to realize that the Prohibition arguments
against whiskey and other distilled liquors were
so firmly based on undeniable facts that the time
must come when whiskey at least would be put
under the ban. The brewers, casting about for
a way to save their bacon, discovered what they
thought a way of retreat in the severance of their
interests from those of the distillers.
It would not do at all for the break to come
suddenly. So a “Campaign of Education” was be-
gun, and In various papers all over the country
now appear occasional articles intended to show
that, while the drinking of distilled liquors may
be highly injurious, the moderate use of beer and
light wines may be highly beneficial.
The articles are adroitly written, but their trend
is obvious—to create a public opinion which draws
a distinction between the two classes of intoxi-
“In California now there are 108 ‘dry’ super-
visorial districts, 45 ‘dry’ incorporated cities. More
than 300 town have voted ‘dry’ since January 1,
1912. Within the last two years 818 saloons
have been closed by ballot in 80 supervisorial dis-
tricts in this purisdiction. Two years ago, in Cal-
ifornia, there were 200 ‘dry’ towns; there are now
682 ‘dry’ town, and more than one-half the ter-
ritory of this State is free from saloons.”
This is a part of what men used to call con-
temptuously “women’s work.’ No wonder the
liquor interests of the country bitterly fight every
extension of the suffrage in the direction of sex
democracy! The battle for social betterment is
not always won when saloons are legally abolished.
But who doesn’t find California better off today
than two years ago, when the accident of sex
made and unmade voters?—Collier’s Weekly..
purpose ef enabling us to concentrate our strength
in behalf of one man for Governor.
Our people are accustomed to primary elec-
tions. It is the method adopted in this State
of selecting our nominees; and I think the fair-
est way that could be devised for getting an ex-
pression as to the choice of our people for Gov-
ernor. .
It has been suggested that possibly we could
not get all counties to hold a primary. That may
be true, but I believe, with conditions confronting
our people, and their desire to avoid the folly of
past years, that in every county where we have
any considerable, number of Prohibitionists there
are enough men who would gladly contribute to
defray the expenses necessary for such an elec-
tion.
I believe, if such an election is held, that it
will be wise to have printed upon the ballots, in
substance, “I am a Democrat; believe in State-
wide Prohibtion, and will vote for the choice
of this primary.” This to be signed by every
voter. If this could be done, I take it there are
few who will be able to vote in such a primary
election who are not in sympathy with our move.
I can conceive of no way by which we could
hope to get the opinion of our Prohibition forces
as well as by a primary. I feel sure that there
is no Democrat Prohibitionist who would not be
wiling for the peple to pass upon this question.
In fact, men are mere incidents. A great princi-
ple confronts us—a great cause, a cause'that calls
for the best there is in us, and imperatively de-
mands that we avoid the folly of the past, and
in some way conserve our forces by agreeing upoon
and supporting some one man for Governor.
Undoubtedly there will be placed upon the
ticket for the Democratic primaries in 1914, a de-
mand for the submission by the next Legislature
of a constitutional amendment to prohibit the
sale of whiskey. The issue will be clearly drawn,
and we know, from past experience, that, regard-
less of the number of men our Anti friends may
have in the field, their vote will be almost as a
unit in favor of some one of their number; and
if our forces are divided, although I believe we
have conservatively seventy-five thousand majority
of Democrats who are Statewide Prohibitionists,
we are in grave danger of defeat if we have two
men in the field.
While the Prohibition question next year will
be, in my opinion, the paramount issue, yet there
are other vital matters that will seriously con-
cern the welfare of our people, which will have
to be dealt with. Our State is financially em-
barrassed; our schools are crippled for lack of
funds; our insane and other wards of the State
are improperly cared for. In view of all this, we
need a big, strong man, intellectually, for Gov-
ernor—one who is not only right on the Prohi-
bition question, but who will be able intelligently
to co-operate with the Legislature in solving these
many vital problems.
It seems to me that if we are wise we will
select only one man as our standard bearer for
Governor. Whether this is done by the primary
or some other plan, that a conference of Prohi-
bition Democrats may decide upon, I shall hearti-
ly join with them in an honest effort to select
a suitable man, AND ONLY ONE MAN, who will re-
ceive the Democratic-Prohibition vote of this State
for Governor in 1914.
has been done me by the dispatches that have
been sent out indicating that I was opposed to
law enforcement.
I was, before my entrance into politics, and am
now, a firm advocate of and believer in law en-
forcement. I have been and am now an advo-
cate and believer in laws prohibiting the manu-
facture and sale of intoxicating liquor.
The last election of members of the General
Assembly of Tennessee resulted in sending to the
Legislature a majority in both houses who were
regarded as hostile, not only to legislation strength-
ening the present Prohibition statutes in Ten-
nessee, but opposed to their maintenance on the
statute books. Under these conditions, several
gentlemen who had been interested in the fight
for good government in Tennessee, assembled and
made an agreement looking to the preservation
of the Prohibition laws, and, in consideration of
that, pledged themselves not to attempt any further
legislation during the life of that Legislature upon
the liquor question.
At this conference Governor Hooper was sup-
posed to have been present through a represent-
ative, and he was advised of the result of the
conference immediately thereafter, and the parties
so advising him reported to the conference his ap-
proval of the agreement. This agreement became
a matter of common knowledge and was published
almost daily in the press that was hostile to the
Prohibition laws.
This agreement provided further for the defeat
of certain candidates of the liquor interests for
State offices, and for placing additional power and
patronage in the hands of Governor Hooper. Un-
til after legislation as the result of this agree-
ment was enacted, giving Governor Hooper ad-
aitional power and patronage, he made no pro-
test against the agreement, but expressed at least
tacit approval of it by his actions.
Subsequently, he came out publicly against the
agreement and urged the passage of legislation
which it was agreed should not be passed. There
would not have been, in my opinion, a possibility
o passing additional legislation upon the liquor
question had it not been for votes of members of
the Legislature friendly to certain defeated can-
didates for State offices.
I intend, in the future as in the past, to advo-
cate all measures in the interest of good govern-
ment and for the betterment of conditions, for
which I have fought in Tennessee. Having made
the agreement -whether wise or unwise, popu-
lar or unpopular—I felt in honor bound to keep
it. LUKE LEA.
WHY TOLERATE PREVENTABLE CRIME?
A NORTH CAROLINA negro, the other day,
% loaded up with cocaine and whiskey, shot
and dangerously wounded a policeman and
was promptly hanged by a mob.
The lynchers executed the right negro—there
is no question on that score. But a South Caro-
lina newspaper, commenting on the occurrence,,
pertinently asks:
“Who is responsible for the bad whiskey that
fills our South., Who is it that makes the ignorant,
degraded negro his tool for the commission of all
kinds of crime? Who is it that doles out that ter-
rible thing, cocaine, with which the negroes in
ever-increasing numbers are becoming crazed?
Who .are running blind tigers and ‘clubs’ and
places of ill fame and gambling?”
Unspeakably bad white men, to fatten their
own pocketbooks, manufactured and sold the
“dope” which set this negro crazy and caused his
crime. The negro lost his life, the officer may
die, and an entire community was besmirched by
the action of the mob.
Medical science has made great forward strides,
with the help of almost every municipality and
State in the land, in combating preventable dis-
eases of the human body. What shall be said of
a civilization which tolerates this preventable dis-
ease of the social body?
L /
small men of hypocritical nature are more often
rewarded than are the really big men of the State.
* * * He has shown that the State institutions
are not what they should be. He has traced the
trouble to the Prohibition question and other
minor fads and fancies. * * * We must com-
pliment him for tracing the cause of Texas ’trouble
so well and for giving expression to it in no un-
mistakable manner. * * * The Statesman has more
than once harped on the fact that the people of
Texas have of late years rewarded hypocrisy rather
than honesty of opinion and real merit. * * *
The Statesman has seen the man of ability go
down before his mediocre competitor because the
people had only one question in their minds—
Prohibition.”
And a column or so more of inky tears of
about the same ooziness.
Oh, you naughty Prohibition Democrats! YOU
are responsible for Colquittism; YOU are to blame
for the penitentiary mess; it is YOUR fault that
the educational institutions are obliged to go on
half rations; and the poor, dear Antis are not in
the least responsible, not even the Governor and
the redoubtable ex-Colonel who controls the pol-
icies of the Statesman!
If the Senator from Austin will make a few
more speeches of the same kind, no doubt he will
chase all the Prohibition Democrats in the State
to the other side of the Rio Grande, and then
we shall have peace.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Thomas, W. W. Home and State (Dallas, Tex.), Vol. 15, No. 13, Ed. 1 Saturday, October 18, 1913, newspaper, October 18, 1913; Dallas, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1569569/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Library and Archives Commission.