The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-03-25

seeking appointments in the West Indies, and
we commend them to the serious attention OF
all interested. We expect the publication OF
them will create regular stampede among the
aspirants to consular dignity now besieging
. the capital.
ACCURACY OF THE TRIBUNE, ON THE LIQUOR
LAw-The Tribune quotes portion Of an ar
ticle from the Richmond Wing, which origin
ally appeared in this paper, in regard to the
progress of the various laws prohibiting the
sale of liquor, and the success they have met
with before the legislatures of number Of the
States. and appends to it the following, which
purports to correct q number Of errors into
which it alleges we have fallen:-
l. Illinois never tried the Maine Liquor law, nor
any nearly 80 good. 2. It has not yet been voted
upon in the present Legislature of Wisconsin; that
Of last year was strongly for it, though the bill pass
ed by the House was barely defeated in the Senate.
8. Michigan instead of rejecting the law. has adopt
ed it, subject to the approval OF the people Is
not dead letter in Massachusetts, though Boston
and Judge Curtis have embarrassed and enfeebled
its operation. So much for depending on the accu-
racy Of the NEW YORK HERALD,
In answer to the above, we contend and re-
peatFirst, that Illinois has tried the prohibitory
liquor law, and that said law was approved and
signed by the Governor Of the State on the first
day of February. 1851, and that 1t remained
upon the statute books, and was in operation
for upwards of two years, and was only repealed
by an act passed by the last Legislature, which
went into effect on the 18th ultimo Second
We did not assert that the law had been
voted upon by the present Legislature Of Wis
consin; we plainly stated. without naming any
particular session, that it had been defeated,
which the Tribune admits was the fact; and
we arc enabled now to announce that it has
again been rejected by the present Legislature.
Third--The liquor law in Michigan is far from
being the Maine law and contains very little
that harmonzes with the stringent and coercive
features Of the law in Vermont. Nor is it fact
that Michigan has adopted it. It has, it is true,
been passed by the Legislature, and will short
ly come before the people. to be by them sane
toned or rejected Fourth-If the liquor law is
not dead letter in Massachusetts at the pre-
sent time to what extent of rum drinking and
inebriation. we would ask, must the good peo-
pie of that commonwealth be driven, before it
would become SO in the eyes Of the Tribune?
There are now more arrests for drunkenness, as
the statistics show, and more committals for
rowdyism and other crimes-the causes Of which
can be traced directly to the dram shops Of
Boston and its vicinity-than there were when
liquor was supposed to have been imbibed from
fifteen gallon kegs, and dealt out gratuitolsly
at striped pig exhibitions $50 much for
depending on the accuracy of the New York
Tribune"
In connection with the subject Of the liquor
law. we will mention one or two facts which
are not altogether inappropriate to the present
article. A recent case-and we believe the
first one under the Vermont enactment-will
serve to present the stringency Of that
law and also show the injustice which
may grow out of its operation. 1t pro-
vides that whenever any person is found in
toxicated he may be apprehended and put
in prison and retained in custody until he
reveal to the authorities, on oath. where and
from whom the liquor which produced his in
toxication was obtained. Under this section Of
the law a man was arrested at Woodstock on
the day it came in force-the 9Th inst.-and be-
scous state he was in while under the influence
Of the liquor, where he procured it, he was Of
course unable TO give the required information,
and has consequently remained in prison ever
since with no hope of being relieved, except by
formal trial before the Supreme Court of the
State.
We have also fact to mention, which
is connected with the operation of the Liquor
law in its birth place. The statistics of
Portland, Maine, show that the number
of persons committed for drunkenness in
that city, from April 1851, to March, 1852,
was 325, out of which number III were dis
charged, the complaint against them not
having been established. or, in other words
they were falsely charged, leaving 2oe actual
cases of drunkenness during the year. From
April, 1852, to March, 1858, there were 273
committals for the same offence, and 81 dis
charged, making the number of well founded
cases during the latter year, 2A2, or an increase
of 81 cases over the aggregate number Of the
preceding twelve months. How will this be
accounted for where the sale of liquor by
most stringent law, is strictly prohibited
TIE BARR AND BUTLER CoNTRovERsY-We
can follow this affair no farther. The last card
of Mr.. Butler. of two mortal columns and half,
in the Journal Of Commerce, blocks the game.
His closing paragraph, however. will show how
the matter stands