Dear Mithrilsouls,
Here are my answers to your questions. Although I have regrettably not met any of your members (knowingly, at any rate), I trust the honor of the dwarves that you shall be open-minded and honest in your considerations of the following points.
1. Should duergar, kobolds, orcs and goblins be allowed into any part of Sanctuary? Would you support the right of citizens attack and kill them on sight?Such races should not be part of our city. They are of no benefit to us, particularly the goblinoids who are a continuing source of frustration and entirely detrimental to the sort of society I desire us to live within. My one concession, although I'm sure you will disagree due to understandable racial prejudices, is that there may be some positive benefits from trading with duergar on a limited scale.
2. Will you continue to allow kobolds of the Shadow Tribe to occupy one of the finest pieces of real estate in Old Sanctuary? Will you subscribe to the argument that we need their dragon they worship as a god to protect us, as well as continue to purchase ore from them for our economy?
From my history studies, I have not found any empirical evidence against the dragon known as the Great Shadow Death to say that he means us any harm. Of course, he has not shown any specific reason as to why he ought to be an ally, either. Similarly to our concerns with the duergar, I believe it in our best interests to remain on neutral terms with the Shadow Tribe. Frankly, we don't need any more enemies. Although it was not mentioned in the previous question, kobolds as a whole are crude, uncivilized, and undesirable for our society and should only be granted any sort of protection under the terms of neutrality.
3. Should the style of execution in Capital Convictions be at the whim of the Councilor, giving them the right to declare by what means the condemned shall die?
The laws ought to be systematic and set. Execution laws are ambiguous from my understanding, and ambiguous laws are rarely favorable to the people they protect. If the discretion of councilors is to determine the means of execution, it should be written into the law and this ability explicitly given or taken from the councilors.
4. Should Sanctuary try to remain unnoticed by our dangerous neighbors for the safety of the majority, or actively seek to thwart the cruel practices of slavery and worse?
This is a matter of balance. Too much attention would be extraordinarily dangerous and should be avoided; on the other hand, it is in our best interest to relieve others from bondage to increase our constant population fluctuations. This question does ignore one important point-- we must be prepared to receive freed slaves. As it stands, there is no social function to prepare slaves for normalization; this is an ongoing problem that may be beyond the scope of our current society until experts and wise men can be questioned. Of course, my militarization ideas holds the prospects of ensuring steady information regarding slave routes and will allow us to be more informed about the activities of slaving races out in the Underdark.
5. Will Lower continue to be a lawless place where the strong may do as they wish to the weak, or should Sanctuary proper send in the Watch or mercenaries to enforce their law to protect the weak at the risk of violence and bloodshed once more?
Lower Sanctuary is not part of Upper Sanctuary. While its position is regrettable, it is their own desire to be left as is. Upper cannot interfere as an institution any more than the Shadow Tribe can come to our land and lay down their own constitution. If changes are to be made there, it must be done by either the people there or individuals who wish to make such changes, NOT the government of Sanctuary. That aside, the Watch is hard pressed as it is and such a mercenary force is, to my best knowledge, unavailable unless we hire out of Mur. This would be unfavorable.
Candidate Illario Dentra