Dr. Crane calls alcohol a drug and, in so doing, places it in the same category as opium, morphine, etc. Is he not inconsistent? He also states, in the same letter, that he is no teetotaler. Is he not, then, by his own statement, a drug addict? Crane receives his title of doctor from a divinity source rather than from a. medical one, T believe. We have, recently, had a suit at law, in the courts of New York, instituted by a very great surgeon, to prohibit the Prohibition Department from interfering with the doctor in his prescribing whiskey for minor ailments, etc. Does Crane assume to tel] us that the famous surgeon, who instituted this suit, is striving to create a nation of drug addicts?. Do the thousands of physicians who agree with this groat surgeon, also, wish to create a nation of drug addicts?
Crane tells us that the saloon is gone, forever. In the same paragraph he states that. the prohibition law may be modified~—. By modification, I presume, Crane means that the residents of the United States will be permitted light wines and beer, If such be the case we shall have to have a place where wine and beer may be dispensed. Paraph-razing the "rose by any other name," may I ask Crane if it la not a fact that one might get just as drunk in a dispensary as in a saloon? In other words, a as good a place to get a "skin-saloon by any other name is just
full" as it was in other days.
Crane may believe,.as he states, that he is not a propagandist. But I should like to ask him where and how he came of the opinion that the plain "Main Street'' folks were ce solidified in conviction that they swept the -amendment (Prohibition amendment) through by " decisive vote? Isn't it a fact that Prohibition was "slipped over" on an unsuspecting public? Isn't it a fact that that great rank and file of "Main Street"' folks never lclieved that the fanatics, possessed of a great organization and tons of money, would be able to pass so silly a measure and for that reason were not organized to oppose it?
PURE PROPAGANDA, The stereotyped argument. that Prohibition, because it is in the form of a "constitutional amendment, will never'be rescinded is pure propaganda. It is the Anti-Saloon League's prize argument for discouraging any attempt on the part of those opposed to it. Isn't it a fact, Dr. Crane, that neither the Fourteenth nor the Fifteenth Amendment are enforced? They are, in the santo measure as the Lighteenth, amendments to the Constitution of the United States, ave they not? This being so, why are they not enforced?
Do you not, Dr. Crane, and have you not, Dr, Crane, for some time worked for William Randolph Hearst? Do you_ not write for his publications? Is he not a Prohibitionist? Has he not, always, been a Prohibitionist? Isn't it a fact that Hearst
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.