Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1854-10-09

vi tllC OulIoO states.
Address of the Members of the E.e-
gassature, Friendly 10 a PrOalE-
bitOry Liquor Law.
To the people Of the State of Wiscons;,e
We the undersigned, members of the
Senate and Assembly, friendly to the pas
sage Of the Prohibitory Liquor Law, after
mutual consultation, have concluded that
III justice to ourselves and the friends oil
the temperance reform throughout the
State, a brief and correct history of the ac-
ton Of the Legislature upon this important
measure should be published, and, through
the columns Of the public press, be placed
within the reach of every person in the
State. In accordance with this conclusion,
we have drawn up the following statement
Of the inception, progress, and final defeat
of "the bill for the suppression of the traf-
fic in Intoxicating drinks for improper pvr-
|poses," during the late session.
Ever since the State of Maine set the
glorious example Of prescribing the impro-
per traffic in spirituous liquors, within her
bounds, and the innumerable evils which
follow in its train, the subject of prohibi-
tory liquor law has been agitated more or
less, by the people of Wisconsin. For
two sessions Of the Legislature, prior to the
last, Intellectual attempts have been made
to pass law of this character. Petitions
were poured in upon the Legislature du-
ring the session of 1853, from all QUARTERS
of the State, and the measure demanded
by voice more potential than ever asked
for any other law of that body. Had it
been for the restriction of any other evil,
that voice would have been obeyed at
once; but the Legislature shrank from the
responsibility of passing, what, in the mil
dest phrase, they feigned to believe an ex-
pertinent in Legislation. The only con-
cession which they condescended to make
to the demands Of the people was to allow
them the poor privilege of voting upon the
question Of such a law at the ensuing gen
eral election. Last November the people
voted upon that question, and by hand
some majority, demanded of their repre-
Isentatives the enactment of such a law.
The question entered largely into the
choice of representatives, and decided
majority of the members of the Assembly
were elected from among the friends of the
principle Of prohibition.
In the Senate the case was different
One half Of the members held over from
last year. They were elected with no re-
ference to this subject, and majority OF
those thus held over were hostile to the
prohibitory liquor law. The influence Of
party is stronger in the election of Sen
ator then member of the House. Those
elected last fall were mostly chosen with a
view to the coming election Of United
States Senator, at the session Of 1856
Less thought was bestowed, in consequence,
to their vote upon the measure in question
The result was that of thirteen members
chosen at the last election, seven were
friendly to the prohibitory law, and six
were opposed to it. A majority of the
members held over from last year being
opposed to it, the predominating influence
in that body was hostile to Prohibition
Several of the latter class Of Senators cleo
ted in the fall Of 1853, represented, or ra-
ther misrepresented, districts which gave
heavy majorities for the prohibitory law at
the last general election. Had those dis
tricts elected Senators at that time, they
would, without doubt, have chosen none
but genuine friends to this measure. This
explains the course of the Senate on the IL
quor bill, and is sufficient guarantee, that
had the entire Senate, like the Assembly,
been elected last fall, when this question
was fairly before the people, both houses
would have been friendly to its passage
and no difficulty whatever would have
been found in enacting it.
| During the first week of the late session
the Hon. James D. Raynler5 OF Wauke-
sha, introduced bill in the Senate '.to
prohibit the manufacture of intoxicating
drinks" The bill was very stringent in
its. provisions, and provided for being sub
mitted 10 vote of the people at the next
! November election. The last section con-
tanned Instructions to the meet Legislature.
that, in case majority of the votes sho'd
be cast in favor of the bill, that body sho'd
enact law precisely similar to the bill, in
question, with the expectation of the por-
ton referring to such submission; if ma
jority were against it that Of course would
put an end TO the matter. 4
Somewhat later in the session, the por-
ton of the Governors Message which rela-
ted to a prohibitory law, was referred in
the Assembly to the committee on judicia-
~, majority of whom were in favor OF
the measure. The committee, after a tho
rough investigation Of the subjeet,l drew
up a bill with great care and, with the
light of past experience in other States,
studiously avoided all constitutional objec-
tions, and nnpracticable or unnecessary pro
visions contained in the similar laws which
several of the States have adopted. This
bill accompanied by brief report recon-
mending its passage, and signed BY -four
of the FIVE members of the Judiciary COM
mittee, was reported to the house, Soon
after, a meeting of the members Of the
Senate and Assembly, friendly to the pas
sage of the law embodying the principles
of the measure known as the Maine Law,