Debates in the Senate on the Eighteenth Amendment, 1917

July 31, 1917

NATION -WIDE PROHIBITION.32 min read
666: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 666 (Senate1917.Jul31.666)

J feel that I am able to say with authority that were it not for the fact that we have in effect a thoroughly dependable liquor law, pro· hibiting the manufacture · and sale of intoxicating liquors in this Stat(', it wou;d be difficult, ind e ed, to maintain order. As it is however even nnlle1· these apparently adverse conditions , the · authorities are enabled to maintain tb e usual good ord e 1· with comparative ease

667: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 667 (Senate1917.Jul31.667)

Hoping this brief statement ~ m e nt of fact may be of us e to you I am

670: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 670 (Senate1917.Jul31.670)

Mayor El Dorado City, Butler County, Ka n s.

672: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 672 (Senate1917.Jul31.672)

SED.!~~ KA.~~ •• January 5, 1916. Senator WILLIAM H. THompson,

674: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 674 (Senate1917.Jul31.674)

DEAR Sm: 'l'h e city of Sedan, Kans., has a bonded indebtedness of but $21,000. It is a third-class city that pays cash for its running expenses. It bas no outstanding warrants. We have little drunkenness. If you will gillc us a law making it nec<'ss a ry for those that hold a Government license to sell intoxicating liquors to come out in the open, or better still, have the Government refuse to license them ' to .sell it, we will make a State law making the point of delivery the point or place of sale, and then we will be able to enforce the law with little or no effort. This administration and the people of Sedan stand for the enforcement of the prohibitory law. The law prohibits and it is as thoroughly prohibitory of this offense as of other offenses . '.fhere 1s absolutely no sentiment in this community for the repeal of the law. We are here on the ground and we know, and the sentiment here stands squarely for the prohibitory Jaw.

678: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 678 (Senate1917.Jul31.678)

JUDICIAL DEPAnTl\IE~T, STATE OF KANSAS,

679: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 679 (Senate1917.Jul31.679)

Columbus, Kans., January · y 13, 1911. Senator WILLIAM H. THOMPSON,

681: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 681 (Senate1917.Jul31.681)

DEAR SIR: I received your letter with reference to the pwlll b itot·y liquor law some time since and perhaps ought to have answered sooner, but, owing to the hurry of business in court and some other matt e r s i have overlooked the same until now. ' In writing to me you possibly overlooked the fact that I r ('s ide in the center o~ the one .section of the State that has gained the undesir able distinction of bemg known as the " Bad Lands," when spok e n of in connectiOn With this law, and the truth is we have bad some tr o uble in the enforcement of that law in this ~art of th e State. We lla ve a population a very large per cent of which is min e rs and also a v e ry large per cent of . whom are of foreign birth. - We are also situat e d immediateLy adjacent t1 the city of Joplin, Mo., a lat•g e mining c e nt e r with large brewing and distilling interests, but in spite of all ( b e se disadvantages it has been demonstrated abundantly that th e J law can be enforced in this district. And even situated in this locality, my oldest son was almost of age before he ever saw a saloon, and 'that was ID Joplin, Mo., and while, as I said above, there · are some violations of law in this district, the comparison of this district with those just across the line, ~ where they have open saloons, will convince any fair-minded person beyond any question that th e moral eff e ct o f the law upon a community is greatly to its advantage. And this is fm·· ther evidenced by the fact that when petty criminals in tbi s co m­ munity , and especially those who persist in the violation of thi s law, are crowded a little too hard by th e officers, they invariably g o R !'l · o ss the line, wh e re they can find op e n saloons, and no commoni tv ll o w ~.> >er low, can be benefited by the addition of that class of peopl e ;

682: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 682 (Senate1917.Jul31.682)

I have been directly connected in one way 01' another wltb t he e n­ forcement of tl't:s la.w at different times for a period of six ye a1 ·: , and I know whereof 1 speak. I am heartily tn sympathy with nn v effort you can make for national prohibition, and you hav e my sincere wish e s that you may succeed, as we are in a community whose p e cnll a 1· s itu· ation will be most benefited by that law.

683: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 683 (Senate1917.Jul31.683)

With very best wishes for your success, I remain,

686: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 686 (Senate1917.Jul31.686)

Judge Ele v enth Jttdi c ial D is t r ict.

687: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 687 (Senate1917.Jul31.687)

OFFICE OF THE CL E RK , Columbus, Ka11s., January J Z , 1 917.

688: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 688 (Senate1917.Jul31.688)

Hon. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Washington, D. a.

689: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 689 (Senate1917.Jul31.689)

MY DEAR SENATOR: Your letter of the 30th ul t imo , relative to "Does prohibition prohibit?" in Kansas. As an ex ec utive offi ce r of the State I will say: Yes; the fault lies not with the law, but with its enforcement. Nine-tenths of all arrests made h e re in Columbus are drunks caused by our close proximity to the Mi s souri line · w e re _ we 100 or 150 miles from Missouri instead of 25 miles our city prison would be of no use.

690: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 690 (Senate1917.Jul31.690)

The law is meritorious and only n ee ds offic e rs who will <>n f orce it without fear or favor, and when this ls done the law will a cc om· plish what its framers intended it should tto.

691: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 691 (Senate1917.Jul31.691)

We are pleased to note that you are taking th e c o rr ec t stand o n this great question, 0 0 * and you may b e a ss ur e d that your a cti on meets with our hearty approval. You ruay feel free t o u sc t hi s e l tt e r in the spirit in whkb it is writt e n.

692: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 692 (Senate1917.Jul31.692)

With best wishes, I beg to be rememb e red as

694: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 694 (Senate1917.Jul31.694)

A. L. REMALEY, . \LEY, Mayor. SCAMMON, KANS., January 9, 1917. Mr. W. H. THOMPSON,

695: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 695 (Senate1917.Jul31.695)

United States Senate, Wash i ngton, D. 0.

696: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 696 (Senate1917.Jul31.696)

DEAR SIR: In answer to your inquiry about whether prohibiti o n 1n Kansas is a failure or actually prohibits, I should say it prohibits. But being so close to the State of Missouri here in our town it has made it difficult to handle, but for the last four years we . have got pretty good control over the booze. As you know, Scammon is a mining town and has a great many foreigners, and they . most all like their booze. Now, then, I will give you facts and figures. Scammon has a population of 2,364, and the actual cases in police court that came from drunks for the last four years would be about one a month, and all other . crime is gradually growing less. Every year I have a chance to know, for I have been police judge the most part of the last 25 years, and also justice of the peace, and the booze . and all other crime is getting less every year. I say let the good . work go on, and I say the prohibition lp.w in ' Kansas is · not a fail-ure.

702: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 702 (Senate1917.Jul31.702)

Bon. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, United States Senate, Washington, - D. C.

703: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 703 (Senate1917.Jul31.703)

DEAR SENATOR: In reply to your letter of December SO, 1916, relative to prohibition in Kansas, beg to advise that the writer is 35 years old and is a native Kansan and does not ever remember of seeing an open saloon In this State. While it is true that so long as intoxicating liquors are manufactured and allowed to be shipped into this State, there will be more or less of same consumed, however, I am sure there is less temptation for younger men to acquire the habit and also less drunkenness and crime on this account, as nearly all of these crimes · and habits are formed before a man acquires maturity. What I would like to see is nation-wide prohibition, but until that can be accomplished I would like to see laws enacted so that intoxicating liqUor can not be shipped into a State which has prohibition laws of i~ own. ·

704: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 704 (Senate1917.Jul31.704)

You may use this letter as you see fit, and you have my hearty wishes for your success in your fight on the liquor proposition.

705: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 705 (Senate1917.Jul31.705)

Yours, very truly, l\1. M. SMtTII, Mayor.

710: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 710 (Senate1917.Jul31.710)

DEAR Senator: Replying to your letter in regard to the prohibition question, beg to say unqualifiedly that prohibition is a mighty good thing for Kansas.

711: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 711 (Senate1917.Jul31.711)

It IS n success in our city and in our State, a success not only that it prohibits the sale of intoxicating liquor, but that it ' makes our city and State better in every way and a . much more desirable place in which to live. And it is a success financially.

712: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 712 (Senate1917.Jul31.712)

Our city, with a population of 2,300 people, has an assessed valuation of $'2,000,000. We have two splendid national banks in which there i• on deposit about $825,000. We have a magnificent Carnegie Library building; one of the finest purification and filtration waterWOJ ks plants to be found anywhere : a $40 , 000 sewer system; a beautiful white way; om· city is splendidly lighted; we have three elegant parks; splendid churches, well attended; a $40,000 courthouse; a $3::1,000 high-school building ; two good grade school buildings; we have no city prison and our county jail is an old stone building that dates way back to the early days. We have so little use for jails that out· people have not deemed it necessary to build a modern jail of any kind. ·

713: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 713 (Senate1917.Jul31.713)

Of course the . prohibition law, like other laws, is violated at times; but it is enforced to such an extent that it ranks among the bestenforced laws iu the State. There are no saloons, joints, or dives of any kind where liquor is sold ; and a drunken man is seldom seen, even drinking is rare, and this occurs on liquor shipped in from other States.

714: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 714 (Senate1917.Jul31.714)

The rate of taxation in our city, including county, school, and State tax. is $2 per $100, but this rate, which may seem rather blgb, is from improvements, for we have one of the nicest improved _ oved cities going.

715: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 715 (Senate1917.Jul31.715)

Nothing could induce or influence our people to return to the saloon or the sale of intox.icating liquor in any manner. We are more than satisfied, and would not think of changing.

720: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 720 (Senate1917.Jul31.720)

January 6, 1917. non. w. H. TH01IPSOX,

722: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 722 (Senate1917.Jul31.722)

DEAR Sir: Your letter of January 2 3t hand, and will say by looking over the police records now and during the time joints were run here-that was several years a_go-I believe the arrests for intoxicat ion have been reduced about 90 per cent; other crimes accordingly. I have noticed also that when a man · gets to drinking he first gets to fighting, a.nd then if be does not fight he will steal. There is not a case for some time that I have tried for being intoxicated but what the whisky was procured from a traveling bootlegger, or in some instances shipped by express to a fictitious name here. It is a burning shame that we can't have a law passed prohibiting the express companies from bringing the whisky into the State. Better to pass a law prohibiting the manufactUre of all intoxicants. There are families living here that get along very well on the wages the father or husband earn, but let the father or husband get liquor, he gets drunk, put in jail, loses his job, then applies to the city for · necessaries of life. These same families are good citizens, or would be if they could not get the liquor. Liquor, thieving, fighting, and prostitution goes hand in hand, and my observation is get rid of the liquor and the others are more easily controlled.

725: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 725 (Senate1917.Jul31.725)

My term expires January 11, 1917. N. a. Street. WINFIELD, KANs., January 4, 1917. Senatoi' WILLIAU H. THOMPSON,

727: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 727 (Senate1917.Jul31.727)

DEAR SENATOR : ' To answer your request for my personal experience as to the effect of prohibition in Kansas would require a more ' lengthy report than a busy Senator would care to consider. · ·

728: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 728 (Senate1917.Jul31.728)

No one _ will contend that Kansas prohibition prevents all drunkenness or crime as a result of drunkenness. But that drunkenness and crimes . resulting therefrom are greatly reduced by reason of prohibition is so patent a fact that I know of no fair-minded and sane Kansan who would declare otherwise. The beneficial effect of Kansas prohibition will be inestimably furthered when we are assisted by national prohibition.

734: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 734 (Senate1917.Jul31.734)

Mr. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Chairman, Washington, D. a.

735: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 735 (Senate1917.Jul31.735)

DEAR Sr-1 : Your letter of the 30th ultimo received. In regard to the prohibition question in Kansas would say that it is a success in every way, if it ~l's not for the State of Missouri, and one of the best laws ever passed by the people. Unfortunately we are situated close to the Missouri line, which is about 4! miles, and situated on the Kansas and Missouri line on the Missouri side there are three wholesale houses, which retail! more than they wholesale and all the drunks seen in our city are from Missouri. Our Cllr hne 1 also connects with Joplin, 1\lo., which is another outlet for drunkenness, and you can see them get off' from the cars in a drunken condition, also with packages.

736: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 736 (Senate1917.Jul31.736)

.All of our liquor traffic is done by foreigners, and all of om· raids sho:w that the liquor is handled by foreigners and in their private houses. Hardly ever do we get an .American for selling liquor, and the wholesale houses being so close gives us a good deal of trouble with bootleggers; so on the whole it does not prohibit on account- of the State of Missouri. .All of our arrests that are made the defendant will tell the court that be got the liquor in Missouri; and our city would be in · much better condition on the liquor question it 1t bad not been for the State of Missouri. Our police records will bear all o:f this out. The arrests we make all liquor is destroyed, and in an hour they are ov e1· in Missouri and back with a new stock. They go in automobiles.

741: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 741 (Senate1917.Jul31.741)

l\!r. WILLIAM H. THO . THOMPSON, Chairman, Washington, D. C.

742: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 742 (Senate1917.Jul31.742)

DEAR Sm : Replying to your letter of the 30th ultimo, in regard to prohibition in Kansas, will say I do not consider it a failure and am satisfied that the people of Pittsburg would not go back to local option under any consideration.

743: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 743 (Senate1917.Jul31.743)

Of course, we have violations, but most any law is violated. And situated as we are, 4~ miles from the Missouri line and an hour's ride from Joplin, Mo., it makes it doubly difficult for us. The wholesale houses being so close, it gives us a great deal of trouble with bootleggers. In most all of our arrests the defendants say they got the liquor from Missouri,

744: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 744 (Senate1917.Jul31.744)

But, notwithstanding all this, our city is in a much better condition than it was 12 years ago. Then we had in the neighborhood of 28 saloons running open in our town, which then had a population or about 12,000. When the order was given to close the saloons fn Pittsburg it was rumored that Pittsburg would go dead and that business houses that were vacated by the saloons would remain empty, but, on the contrary, as :fast as the buildings were vacated by the saloons they were immediately occupied by some legal business. And to-day our city has a population of 20,000, with no . saloons and not an empty business building in town, and we have never bad a lull or panic in business.

745: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 745 (Senate1917.Jul31.745)

On July 4 1916, we had the largest crowd that ever attended a celebration in . Pittsburg. Several extra peace officers were employed. During the dfty two ~rrests were made for drunkenness and peace disturbing. On July 4, 1900, there waljl an ordh1ary-sized ' cel eb ration crowd in Pittsburg, with !!4 saloons running open. There were nine arrests made that day for drunkenness and peace disturbing, our population at that time being about 11,000.

746: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 746 (Senate1917.Jul31.746)

Therefore I feel that I am voicing the sentiment of the · people of Pittsburg and the State of Kansas when I say that prohibition is morally and economically advantageous to our people .

747: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 747 (Senate1917.Jul31.747)

.Assuring you that your fight on this question meets with our approval, and hoping this information may be of some benefit to you, I remain.

749: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 749 (Senate1917.Jul31.749)

Chi e f of Police. PITTSBURG, KANS., January 19, 1917. Hon. WILLIAM H. Tno:ursox,

751: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 751 (Senate1917.Jul31.751)

DE.m Senator: I have been out of the city a great deal lately, and for this reason, as well as the fact that the mayor, Mr. Lanyon, probably gave you more information than I can, I have not answered your letter concerning the effect of prohibition in Kansas.

752: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 752 (Senate1917.Jul31.752)

We are too near the Missouri State line to feel the full benefit of prohibition, being only 4 miles away; but in my two years' experience as police judge of this city of 20,000 I have not had a single drunk tell me that he became intoxicated upon liquor bought in Kansas. They invariably get their liquor across the State line, and on account of this condition we are deprived of the real benefit of prohibition. According to the police court records, I find that some few months under prohibition we have had more arrests for intoxication than were made under licensed-saloon months, but this is due to the fact that arrests are made now upon very small evidence of intoxication, for the reason that with us a man slightly under the influence of liquor is very noticeable, while in ·the day of the saloon the men now arrested and fined as drunks would have been and were considered as sober and not violators of the ordinance prohibiting excessive users of intoxicants to be upon the streets . ·

753: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 753 (Senate1917.Jul31.753)

If I can be of further service to you, please command me. With kind personal regards, I am,

754: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 754 (Senate1917.Jul31.754)

· Sincerely yours, LEO. J. McKenna, Police Judge.

755: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 755 (Senate1917.Jul31.755)

OFFICE OF CLERK OF THiil DISTRICT COURT,

757: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 757 (Senate1917.Jul31.757)

Hen. W. H. THOMPSON, Washington, D. 0.

758: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 758 (Senate1917.Jul31.758)

DEAR Sm: Yours of some days ago inquiring as to the prohibitory liquor laws of Kansas was received, and in reply I desire to say that I shall endeavor to briefly answer your inquiry.

759: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 759 (Senate1917.Jul31.759)

Is there any intoxicating liquor sold in Kansas? Any honest man is compelled to answer that question in the affirmative. The statute making it a criminal offense to barter and sell intoxicating liquors in . Kansas 'is violated. .

760: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 760 (Senate1917.Jul31.760)

I1 the prohibitory liquor law is violated, does it follow that the law is a failure? The law against murder, rape, robbery, and arson and other criminal statutes are violated, but it would hardly be contended that such laws wE're faiiares and should be repealed by reason of the fact that thE.'y are violatE'd. Probably the most that can be accomplished by any statute is to reduce crime to a minimum. It can not be entirely prevented by law

761: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 761 (Senate1917.Jul31.761)

The law against the sale of intoxicating liquor is being fairly and reasonably well enforced in Kansas. The prohibitory law in Kansas, cit~ I am inclined to think, is quite as well enforced as other criminal statutes in the State. The jurors uo not hesitate to convict in - liquor cases if the evidence warrants. The jurors give liquor cases the same serious consideration they do any other offense. If the evidence satisfies them beyond a reasonable .doubt that . the defendant is guilty, thE.'y convict; if It does not so satisfy them, they acquit, exactly the same as they would in a ea.se · of murder, robbery, rape, or arson.

762: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 762 (Senate1917.Jul31.762)

Unquestionably the -prohibitory law greatly restricts and reduces the sale of intoxicating liquor.

763: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 763 (Senate1917.Jul31.763)

Very sincerely, yours, A. J. CuRRAN, Di-strict Judge.

767: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 767 (Senate1917.Jul31.767)

DEAR Sm: Yours of January 3 to hand. Drunkenness is getting less and less, and, in fact, 1t is almost a thing of the past; but the Government Is at fault for licensing the sale of thE' stuff, and I am ho-ping that national prohibition is not far off. I am persuaded that fo-r every · dollar the Government gets in revenue for license it pays out $10 m -money, saying nothing about the souls sent to h('l1 every year. It dOe!> look like OUr lawmakers could See this awful drain OD our country and · remedy the evil. Prohibition does prohibit drinking 'I as much as law prohibits murder or theft.

772: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 772 (Senate1917.Jul31.772)

Hon. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Washington, D. 0.

773: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 773 (Senate1917.Jul31.773)

· DEAR SENATOR 1 I ba~·e been watching your fight in the SE.'nate for of this county. prohibition and am much pleased with the stand you are taking. We who have livE'd in Kansas the greater part of our lives know that prohibition has helped the State. Those who say that there is more intoxicating liquor consumed in Kansas in proportion to the population than in license States either do not know what they are talking about or uo not care what they say. · I have lived in Kansas near the Nebraska border slm·p the adoption of the prohibitory amendment in 1881, and there was a time when I thought that prohibition did not prohibit but since Kansas officials have been trying to enforce the law it has prohibited and clo<'s prohibit. From thE' time Senator Harris made his campaign for the governorship on the issue of law enforcement the law has been fairly -enforced in the State and a marked change took / place dating from that time. Wc> can truly say W<' have a dry State. A drunken man is seldom seen and crime is lessened and the standard of morality much higher, -especially among our young men, than it wru~ a few years ago. In fu. .... t drinking is unpopular and growing more so under the influencE' of prohibition.

774: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 774 (Senate1917.Jul31.774)

I have not lookE.'d over the records, but It is evident that there is much Jess crime than formerly, and if there are many convictions it is because crime i not respectable in Kansas and the strict enforcement of law is demanded by our citizenship.

775: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 775 (Senate1917.Jul31.775)

Hoping that you may win .and assuring you that the people of your home country ar-e With you. 'I remain,

776: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 776 (Senate1917.Jul31.776)

Sincerely, your friend, W. S. LANGMADm,

779: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 779 (Senate1917.Jul31.779)

ABILENE, KANS., January 11, 1911. Hon. W'ILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Senator.

780: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 780 (Senate1917.Jul31.780)

DEAR Sir: In reply to yours of recent date, will say that prohibition certainly does prohibit with us. During the year 1916 there were five warrants issued and two arrests made for drunkenness and one bootlegger, and no joints running. The morals of our city are good and have been for · sbme time. ·

782: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 782 (Senate1917.Jul31.782)

Police Judge, Abilene, Kans. ABrLENE, KANS., January 6, 1911.

783: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 783 (Senate1917.Jul31.783)

Hon. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Wa8hington, D. a.

784: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 784 (Senate1917.Jul31.784)

HEAR Sm : !n regard to my knowledge of prohibition in Kansas, lt practically does prohlbtt the sale 9f Uqnor in Kansas. We have, of days ago. course, a little trouble with an occasional bootlegger and a little drunkenne s. That, of course, is owing to the ease with which they can get liquor from Miswurl.

785: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 785 (Senate1917.Jul31.785)

In this town before prohibition law was enacted there was from one to three men: killed every year on account of saloon fights or drunkenness, and a number of farmers were foreclosed every year who lost their homes on account of excessive drinking. ' In the iast 10 years there has not been a man killed 'in any fight which could be charged up to liquor. And there are no homes being foreclosed on account of liquor. Every year the few bootleg,g-ers are getting less. Last year in this town of 5,000 there were only two a.rre ts for drunkenness.

786: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 786 (Senate1917.Jul31.786)

We think )Ve have the liquor business just about as near the prohibitory point at. you . could have :!.t in . a. State where they can ship 1t in . from other Stat~~.

789: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 789 (Senate1917.Jul31.789)

TROY, KANS., February 5, W11. p.on. WILLLAM. II . . 'W~:ft~~g: 6 n, D. a. .

790: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 790 (Senate1917.Jul31.790)

MY 'DEAR SENATOR: Answering · the inclosed letter, will say in the first place, please excuse me for not answering before this date as I have been con£Led in the house on account of a severe spell of pneu.

791: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 791 (Senate1917.Jul31.791)

Will state that I have had .five ca.ses before me fo.r drunkenness dur- ing the year 1916, all of which plead guilty and were given a small fine and assessed the eosts —

792: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 792 (Senate1917.Jul31.792)

In regard to the enforcement of the prohibitory law, will state that in this county it is enforced as well Jf not better than in many of the counties of the State.

793: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 793 (Senate1917.Jul31.793)

And will further say that if it was riot for the St. Joseph liquor houses and saloons we would see but very little drunkenness in this Our city has a population of some 1.500, and we are in favor of prob . prohibition, and the people ()f this community would never vote to , do away with the prob1. itory law.

794: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 794 (Senate1917.Jul31.794)

When we bafl OIJ€D saloons we had terms of court lasting from four to six weeks, now we have terms lasting from two to three days each term People are more prGsperous and are building and owning their own homes and are well satisfied and are helping enforce the laws.

798: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 798 (Senate1917.Jul31.798)

LAWRE~Cll, KANS., January 12, 1911. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON,

799: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 799 (Senate1917.Jul31.799)

United States Senate. Washington, D. 0.

800: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 800 (Senate1917.Jul31.800)

DEAR Sm: Your letter of the 3d in regard to the effect of the pro· hibitory law in Kansas received.

801: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 801 (Senate1917.Jul31.801)

Lawrence is a city of 14,v00 people. In addition thereto, they have over 3,000 students in the State university and 1,000 students in Haskell Institute. Our district court meets three time a year ; the criminal business is gc>ner11Uy cleaned up in two or three days. Our police court ln the city of Lawrence meets every morning, and morning after morning there Is no business before thP ('Ourt.

802: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 802 (Senate1917.Jul31.802)

We are on an interurban line. 40 miles from Kansas City, with car service · every bour, -and 99 per--cent of tbP. cases that we have in police court wherein the defendant is charged with being drunk be obtained his liquor in Kansas City. This mterurban line has been in operation not quite a year, and we have bad a littlP more drunkenness to contend with in police court during thh time than we bad before, by virtue of the fact that it has pla-cM us in closer touch with Kansas City, Mo.

803: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 803 (Senate1917.Jul31.803)

The prohibitory law is not a failure in Kansas. It Is a marked success, and I am speaking from experience 1bat I have had as an officerfour yea.rs as city attorney of this city and six years as county attorney

807: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 807 (Senate1917.Jul31.807)

Baldwi1t ai.ty, Kans .• January 11, 1917.

808: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 808 (Senate1917.Jul31.808)

Hon. W. H. THompson, Wa - Washington, D. a.

809: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 809 (Senate1917.Jul31.809)

DEAR Sm: Yours of the 2d instant asking for my experience and opinion as to whether or Lot prohibition prohibits is to band and con· tents noted.

810: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 810 (Senate1917.Jul31.810)

As to wy opinion, I am free to state that it is that.prohibitlon does prohibit and that • we are in a much better condition than we would be without it.

811: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 811 (Senate1917.Jul31.811)

I interviewed some of our citizens in regard to this matter and they unanimously expressed the opinion that the prohibitory law is as well enforced and is as seldom violated as any other law on the statute books of the State, and I surely think they are ('Ot'rN·t in that opinion.

812: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 812 (Senate1917.Jul31.812)

Since I have been police judge, now nearly six years, there have been no arrests fo-r violations .of the prohibitory law, and while there have been suspicions that it has been violated, the officers have failed to find any proof of the same. .

813: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 813 (Senate1917.Jul31.813)

!:;orne liquor has been shipped in from Kansas City, but we have no proof that any has been sold. . ·

814: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 814 (Senate1917.Jul31.814)

In the police court there has been 30 arrests for intoxication, 29 of which plead guilty to the offense,

815: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 815 (Senate1917.Jul31.815)

Of this number nine were nonl'i:'Sidents, one was arrested nine times, two three times each, an • } six others one time each.

816: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 816 (Senate1917.Jul31.816)

If any of this is of any us• · to you, use it.

817: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 817 (Senate1917.Jul31.817)

Hopi:ng you will win your fight, I am,

821: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 821 (Senate1917.Jul31.821)

LoNG.Brucu, CAL., January 31, 19t7. DEAR SENATOR: Your efforts in behalf of prohibition anywhere at any time will be duly appreciated by nine-tenths of all Kansans . . A great thing for Kansas, and will be a great thing for the Nation, when It comes, and which will not be long. Three-fourths of the criminal cases I have tried had origin in the use of liquor.

822: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 822 (Senate1917.Jul31.822)

California will soon be dry also, notwithstanding it is a great grape State. Another of the beach towns. Redonda Beach, voted dry a few I wish you well.

828: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 828 (Senate1917.Jul31.828)

Hon. W!I. H. THompson, _ Washington, D. a.

829: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 829 (Senate1917.Jul31.829)

MY Dear Senator: : In reply to your letter of the 30th ultimo, relative to the prohibitory liquor law of Kansas, will say that I know of no law in our statutes which has a greater sanction by the peo,ple of this State than this law, anrl I do not suppose that anyone will contend that Kansas is a lawless place. . As you know, all law depends upon the sanction of the people in se far as its enforcement is concerned. · There was a time in the enny history of the prohibitory liquor law When it was not sanctioned by a good many people of this State. but those times are . past.

830: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 830 (Senate1917.Jul31.830)

I have livE'd ·n Hays and its vicinity for 32 years and have been and am now mayor ' for tbe last 4 years. . During the . last 4 years since I have been a . law-enforcing Officer of thi.s · State we have had 'bo · bootleggers here who remained rn that · businesS" very long; in fact we usually convicted them on their first or second sale. In fact it is not the local. man so much as the transient bootleggers from Missouri who sometimes drop in between trains with a suit case full of · whisky and manage to make a few sales before they are apprehended by the officers ; but they are quitting that practice.

831: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 831 (Senate1917.Jul31.831)

Although not a total abstainer from the use of intoxicating liquor, I believe that the good government strives for the greatest good to the greatest number. I think that the prohibitory liquor law of . Kansas has met this requirement for Kansans, and I for one would welcome legislation along those lines nationally. . The claim has often been made that people from foreign countries are adverse to prohibition. We have several citizens in Hays of this class and they aid us in enforcing this law at this place.

832: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 832 (Senate1917.Jul31.832)

The population of the city of Hays is about 3,000. Out of this number of people there is not one drunkard; in fad we have no drunkards, paupers, or idlers, but our people are contented, happy, and prosperous. Nearly seven-eighths of them own their own home.s and have money in the banks.

833: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 833 (Senate1917.Jul31.833)

When this letter reaches you it becomes your property, and I have no objections to the use which you may make of it. · Any information which I may be able to furnish you in regard to law enforcement will be cheerfully furnished upon request.

838: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 838 (Senate1917.Jul31.838)

Garden City, Kans., January 26, 1911. Honl 'YM. n. •rnO!IfPSON,

840: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 840 (Senate1917.Jul31.840)

MY DEAR SIR : Having lived in Kansas all my life, and for the last two years having been the sherllr of Finney County, Kans., and thus having been in a good position to observe the workings of the prohibition law, I will say that it has worked in Kansas and has done the State more good than any one law that I kn.ow of. It most certainly reduces crime, lessens drunkenness, and raises the morality of the State to a very high degree. The people, instead of spending money fo"r liquor in its many forms, spend their money on their families and righteous living, and what they do not thus spend they put away m the savings bank, so that the direct result is that there IS a very great number of small depositors who have money put away in the banks of this State as a direct outcome of the prohibition law. It no doubt reduces crime. This I can state from my experience as an officer of the law. The small per cent of crime that is committed in. this State is the result in a large measure to the violation of the prohibition law. Of course the law Is violated some. It would be impossible to pass .a law that was not violated some. The law of murder, larceny, etc., IS also violated yet no one would dare say that the law forbidding the crime of murder, la . larceny, etc., was not a good law. As long as human nature remains as it Is, laws will always be violated, and if . we are going to condemn a law for that reason alone we had just as well stop passing laws right now, for there never will ~e a criminal law pfl;ssetl that will not be violated, more or less. Take 1t as a whole, prohibition has been enforced at least 90 per cent in Kansas and has made Kansas 90 per cent more efficient.

841: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 841 (Senate1917.Jul31.841)

I am in favor of national prohibition, and especially in favor of prohibiting the shipping of liquor from a wet State into a dry State. 1 can not understand why the Federal Government will license a bootlegger in a prohibition State and thus help him violate the law, but not only that but shield his name from the State authorities.

846: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 846 (Senate1917.Jul31.846)

Dodge City, Kans., Ja - January 6, 1917.

847: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 847 (Senate1917.Jul31.847)

Hon, WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Washington, D. a.

848: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 848 (Senate1917.Jul31.848)

DEAR Sm: Yours of December 30 at hand, asking me what had . been my observation relative to prohibition in Kansas, whether a failure or actually prohibits. . . In answer to this will say it prohibits to the minimum m our city, and will in any city or community in the State of Kansas, providing the officers will enforce the law according to their obligations. As you well know our city before prohibition was enforced had a very bad reputation' for drunkenness an ' d _ ail other kinds of vices that go hand in hand with the liquor traffic. But to-day we have a city of 5,000 people, with a day and night marshal, and it is very little they have to do on account of liquor. .

849: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 849 (Senate1917.Jul31.849)

The writer had occasion in the early ' part of December to visit sev· eral States that do not have prohibition, and he saw more drunks, more depravity, and more beggars than be has seen in the State of Kansas in the two years past. ,

850: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 850 (Senate1917.Jul31.850)

Hoping that this will be of benefit to you and will be of some help in furthering the prohibition fight in the Nation, I am,

853: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 853 (Senate1917.Jul31.853)

• . Dodge City, Kans., January 2, 1915.

854: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 854 (Senate1917.Jul31.854)

Hon. WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, Washington, D. a.

855: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 855 (Senate1917.Jul31.855)

DEAR SIR : In answer to your letter ol the 30th, will say that I have been a peace officer for the past six years, and as I have made frequent trips into th~ wet territories, I find that on these occasions tb~t there are more men arrested in the wet territory in one night than 19 in the dry territory in a week. I am of the opinion, and from my observation think, that this condition is wholly caused from the fact that liquor is so readily P.rocured. I realize the fact that the ones that are saying that the prohibitory law does not prohibit, but I will say for my own belief and observation that it does prohibtt . to a great extent, and when in the intoxicated condition, I find that most of our crimes are committed ; for one instance, the killing of my friend and brother officer at Rolla, Kans., last July ; the party was under the influence of liquor; in fact, he was drunk; and in my time I could point to lots more of cases in the same way, but would only take up time, for we people here are so well satisfied with it we will vote almost to a man and woman for the national prohibition clause as . soon as it comes up; · but we do not want it to come so soon that it will be defeated, or before there are enough States that have ratified It, so we will not be able to carry it in all by the necessary majority; but I say I am ready, and I firmly believe that we will meet . with a wave of prosperity that has never been known before in the history of our Nation, for old debts will be paid that will never be until that time. Do all you can. I am for you.

858: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 858 (Senate1917.Jul31.858)

OFFICE Oli' SHERIFF OF FRANKLIN COUNTY, I):ANS.,

859: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 859 (Senate1917.Jul31.859)

Ottawa, Kans., January 6, 1916. Senator W. H. THOMPSON,

861: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 861 (Senate1917.Jul31.861)

MY DEAR Sm: In response to yours of December 30, will say that my experience of fom· years as sheriff Of Franklin County, Kans., is that prohibition not only lessens crime but has upbuilding influence. To be sure, we have among the lower class of both white and colored races a few of what are known in this State as "bootle~get·s," but they. as a rule, only come in contact with a few compared with the many who would perhaps use liquor if we had open saloons. To my mind open saloons in Kansas would be a crime equal to taking the lives of our younger generation.

862: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 862 (Senate1917.Jul31.862)

Yours, very respectfully, NICK JOHNSON, Sheriff.

863: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 863 (Senate1917.Jul31.863)

DISTRICT COURT, FRANKLIN COUN'.r'i, K..U\S.,

864: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 864 (Senate1917.Jul31.864)

Ottatoa, Kans., January 2, 1917. Senator W. H. THOMPSON,

866: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 866 (Senate1917.Jul31.866)

DEAR SENATOR: Answering your recent favor touching the intoxicating-liquor problems of Kansas, I have to say that I have read with considerable interest the debates upon that subject in the Senate. * • • You can put this down as a . settled fact : Prohibition is here to stay. It is as firmly fixed in the . minds of our people as the abolition of human slavery, and is no longer a disputed question. It is a fixture in this State, because lfnr people have become thoroughly convinced that it is a paying investment; that is, that sober men are to be trusted in all stations of life rather than drunken men, and the situation resolves itself down to that proposition. · We have drunkenness in Kansas-there is no question about that-but it js confined exclusively to the lowest degree of citizenship. There is no question that liquor is sold in Kansas, but it is sold by a few Mexicans, a low grade of colored people, and a still lower grade of whites. If anyone desires to buy a drink of whisky in Kansas he can do so, and, from my experience in the trial of lawsuits for nearly a third of s. century, I feel that I am qualified to advise him how be can get the stuff. First, he will have to go into a dark alley, find a Mexican or a low grade of colored or white citizenship, and there intrust such an individual with his money and wait until this most responsible 1ndividual returns with the goods. Or he may be conducted by a citizen of like character * * * past the freight stations, through the railroad yards to the fat · farthest corner of the railroad property, and i:f he will stand in the darkest corner his conductor will go into a box car or behind a pile of ties and secure for him a half pint of stuff that has been shipped in from Missouri, and by the payment of a dollar be may become the proud possessor of this half pint of Missouri enthusiasm. Or, if he does not desire to go so far out of his way, if he will secure the proper signs, signals, grips, and passwords · ,. he may enter a livery barn from the rear door, pass in the rear of the horses and mules, go up a flight of stairs into the second story, and there wait until the bartender removes several bales of hay, he may then purchase the stuff. The place of business may be changed when he returns for the second installment, bJit he will be able to find it, no doubt. This is not overdrawn; this is . the manner in which liquor is purchased in Kansas, as revealed by the testimony of , many witnesses whom I have heard testify in the past 30 years.

867: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 867 (Senate1917.Jul31.867)

I have seen · crowds of from ten to twenty thousand people gather on the fair grounds in different localities in Kansas, remain there three or four days, and not an arrest for drunkenness occur. In the past 15 years I do not recall now of bearing a single reputable citizen testify ' in a whisky case outside of the officers. Both seller and buyer are confined to the lowest class of citizens. • * •

868: Senate, July 31, 1917, ¶ 868 (Senate1917.Jul31.868)

I trust that you and the other Senators who are making the fight for common decency will keep it up until you succeed.

Connections graph

Enter all results↑ ↓ then Enter to open oneTry “Federalist 51”, “Article I, Section 8”, “Amendment 14”

Where you've been

    The places you have read, newest first, kept in this browser only. Nothing is sent anywhere.