Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1854-01-06

fairly stated. Its defects. certainly. have
been very fully discussed-and some o.
them, 1t may not be improper to add, great
ly exaggerated
Wherever faithfully executed, il appear.
ed that the law has materially restrained
and diminished the sale and use OF IL
quOrs for the purpose OF intoxication: drunk
cnness, disorder and crimes have been stri-
kingly hssened the number of paupers
las been largely reduced, and in two of the
large towns it appeared thatthe amount re-.
quired for the maintenance Of the poor has
been reduced one third sine the law went
into effect In an ither large town, where
no part Of the law had been enforced, ex-
ccpting the provision for the arres, Of per
sons intoxicated and disturbing the Inblic
peace, it appeared that this limited enforce
inent had nearly suppressed public drunk
enness We regard il, then, MS certain,
that the evil Of intcnperancc has in eight
months been perceptibly diminished by
the existing law, that public and private
tranquility have been better preserved -
that pauperism and crime have been les
sened that these heavy items Of expense
to the tax payers Of the State have been
proportionateIy reduced and, on the whole,
that the public good has heen materially
promoted.
Inquiries were also made TO by the Com
mittce, to some extent, for the purpose
oI ascertainiug whether any abuses have
been pcrpetrated under cover of the law
and although its opponents have present
cd formidable list OF abuses, TO which
(they aver) the people are subjected. it is
worthy of note that no serious instances
were proved. In one case it was claimed
that drunken man had been arrested
without sufficient cause but this was
contrOycrted. In two cases it was shown
that prosecutions had been undertaken
which were net contemplated by law but
IN both it appeared that this was the work
Of opponents, M rioiqfoa Of the fruc intent
and purpose Of The iar, and evidently de-
signed To bring 1t into disrepute We have
heard OF no Infringement upon the rights
OF peaceable and law observing citizens
OF no Inconvenience or hardship t0 unsus-
pected and innocent men-exceptiug the
iva instances just named W have heard
oil no - "'nt1n and malicions intrusion in
% any man 0~siliug 80 and although tri-
al 10y Jury has s1metin rs hc.u denied. we
have heard of no injustice consequent op.
un thar face.
W.rkip., VOL 3, tl, mar, ,s II ,,,,,o,r-
od r,t ,6o ls,r has ,,lrl.5 ana Cl.n nj.
t,o .t,to has Lo.n Il. Nv, .'r,".,, J;.tnri,,n.
cesand abu scs, we cannot recommend either
"a repeal or radical change of the exist
ing law In our Judgment the best inter
csts OF the State require that, in all its es-
Tl.ro any, ,tt...,;.,,.+..ho has, ,-o ...li
t,i,r ,,t;.b ..r, r,.l;.'l n,,. Il, - =.
Io s..., ,,L.,L.r ~. .'r, ,.,alJ, Mn.
H. Az. l,,,. ,,.,, lso,, .,.,,;,,d lac tIo
,...,r,.,.f Ill.,, S,,t, ;'.-.
'lStN Ii'i'' """ l''I tl'ui"ll! 90 primer pes "t
ciared 10y most of the Judges OF the Nu-
preme Court oi The United States. we believe
that these objections cannot be supported.
Neaiiude unconstitutional objections. iuunt-
e1 on the principles 90 lrIhi1ti1u-thc
d strnct0n or cJuiiscation of liquors, and
tlo rightui search and seizure boz the man
ncr authorized hy the act of 1852. Those
are radical oicctln- and If they are
maintained, 10 b. apparent that i-9 ,Hulu
tair for the prevention of inienperauce cau
ever hc devised, until the constitution II.
self shall have been changed. In amy &c
vent, therefore. un adjudication ot cheese
principles, by the highest courts is of the
utmost importance, both 20 the friends and
opponents Of the law Were no othrr rur-
pose possibly 70 he attained, we would.
for this reason alone leave the law in
these particulars unaltered. Until such an
adjudication has been had, the undersigned
are unanimously ot the opinion that the
PRINCIPLES ot prohibition, destruction of IL
qu9rs iorleited. and Of the night of search
anu seizure should remain unchanged.