Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1847-05-13
License Laws.


The people Of the Slate Of New York, except in
the city, lave been holding an election by Counties
upon q question Of granting licenses retail sp-
rtOus liquors The Journal Of Commerce says Of tie
result at is unnecessary to give details ;-almost
every town have heard from has voted in favor Of
licenses, and generally by large majorities a
year ago they gave against them. The change is
great,-indeed it is overwhelming. Probably it has
been found by experience, that ntemperance is less
rampant under the license system than without it."
Similar laws seem 10 work no better in Massachu-
sets. The truth is that laws prevent the retail Of
spurious liquors must the very nature Of things be
imperative. As long there makers and con-
sumers of such liquors, they will be sold defiance of
all the laws which be made. 1t is perfect habalg
suppose that the appettes passions Of men can be
erodcated essentially changed by Legislative enact
nent But the law regulate and partially control
those passions and appettes and this all that sensi-
BILE would aim at, for the simple that expo
rence proves that il is all that is practicable. Some
observations recently made by the Worcester. Mass.
"Palladium" are very sensible. and point out course
which would certainly be practicable and efficient:
'sWe ske- the wbeIe system of licensing 1t
makes the government pedtar Of i,udugences 10 one
portion Of The people to do that hich orbids The mass
% do. Could we have way in all such mat
ters, all such privileges (f they deserve the name)
should be banished away and totally abolished and
every should be left free trade in any article
recognized a vendible commodity, whatever might
be Its character without the interference Of the gov
ernment, and upon his responsibility under the gene
raj laws which rest alike upon every citizen.
Were all license laws abolished prosecutions would
then reach the true point Now, the issue is, ichether
ertain h'cs hare been rioated by men who have not
been authorized to do what others may do with mpu-
atty; and thus this secondary becomes the primary
consideration in the case whereas if the license laws
were swept away. the issue would be, not whether
the respondent guilty Of violating petty pro-
vision of petty statute, but whether he guilty
of nuisance. The burden of proof would then be,
not whether there had been infraction of statute
Of indulgences TO privileged class Of citizens but
whether dealer in spIrituous liquors so demeaned
himself to render his business injurious to the pub
lie welfare. Public sentiment may always be trusted
TO rally for the legal abatement of nuisance where
it manifest that one exists but it always has, and
always will come up slow to condemn the act Of one
individual as deserving Of fine, Imprisonment, and
stripes, while the law declares the in
another individual right and proper in itself and TO
be and sustained by the whole force of
the government. There is inconsistency in such
code of morals that is painfully ludicrous. Acting
upon it, the government incts the severest chastise-
men upon class for the very acts which it auho-
rizes another class to do with mpunty Ittakes mo-
ney from both classes 1t sells to the right to put
the law in force and it fines the other for doing what
in fact amounts to pretty much the same thing.
We should be greatly disappointed if marked
change for the better did not follow the total abolition
of all such stumbling blocks in the way of the moral
progress of society, license laws. At least such is
our individual opinion, long since adopted and often
expressed. If any thinks he has better one we
make him welcome to hold it and express it whenever
and wherever he peases."