New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-05-06

ordinances bearing on our city, even though Inls
should involve the assumption Of doubtful pow
ers." But the moment be was called to choose be;
tween fidelity TO his pledge and the favor Of the
Liquor interest. be cast the former to the winds
Without waiting for or even invoking any Judicial
decision on the subject he set to work at once to
crcumvent and nuIify the Prohibtory Law, and
succeeded. His control over the Police enabled
him to render the act dead letter, far as this
city was concerned and thus subject it to general
odium as impracticable No man did more than he
TO effect its overthrow.
AT length, new Legislature has passed another,
more moderate and less consistent act, tending to
limit rather than prevent the sale of Intoxicating
Liquors-tO keep the traffic out of the worst hands
dabbling in il, and dismiss seven-eghths Of the
present rumsellers TO more laudabe and useful
employments Had Fernando Wood been asked,
in 1855 to indicate the kind of Liquor Law that he
would recommend, he would doubtless have out
lined one essentially Like this. Yet see how he be-
rates it in his Message abusive of the Legislature:
This is another of the encroschments upon midi
yidual rights for which the dominant party are 20
much distinguished 1t will probably be as fruit
tagonistic 10 the theory that should govern all
American laws. The distinction that it makes be-
tween the selling of liquor by the neh man and
by the poor in aordng facilities for the trade
of the former which il denies TO the latter Is con-
sstent with the dogmas of party which has always
acknowledged the possession of property as proof
of merit Under this ancient tenet OF ltS leaders crime
and mmoraty are TO be tolerated if the perpetrator
belongs 10 the privileged classes, but 10 be severely
punished when discovered in one who is lowly born.
Under the bill, man who can number twenty free
holders among his immediate friends and neighbors,
shall be allowed TO sell the destroying element which,
according to these gentlemen deals death and destruc-
ton to ali who parake OF IT, but the unfortunate poor
man. whose condition deprives him Of this support is
denied the privilege of transactng legitimate trade
recognized and ndorsed by law Bythis condition class
of m0nopolsis is 10 be established, whose merit lies in
property and rich friends while the equally honest aud
worthy are TO be shut out from any participation in the
same traffic. The original Stamp Act of the British Gov
eminent Indignantly repudsted by our foretothers,
far less exacting."
The pretense that this law was passed By the
dominant party"-that is, the Republicans
equally mean and false. Its authors and original
advocates were nearly all conspicuous Demo
Gratis" OF Americans" The "Republicans" held
of, being mainly in favor of Prohibition. 1t was
only when the Floyd Joneses, &c, deserted their
own bantling, that many Republicans resolved to let
it have trial. Its final passage in the Assembly
was carried by the votes of 81 Republicans, 10
Democrats and Americans, while % Republicans,
90 Democrats and no Americans, voted against it.
In the Senate it was carried by the votes Of fire
Republicans, nine Americans, and four Democrats,
including the two from this city-in fact all the
four Senators from this city 1.-TWO Democrats and
two Americans) voted for the bill Against it were
nine Republicans, one American and not one
Democrat. The Democratic party alone gave
unanimous vote in its favor. The Democrats might
have beaten it in either House-had they voted
against it half so generally the Republicans did,
they rould have beaten it in the Senate. In view
of these facts judge what must be the recklessness
of the demasosuo who, for Il local partisan adj
vantage, tells the ten thousand rumseers of this
city that the New License law is an act of
"the dominant [Republcanl party" How they
roll back upon him his base calumnies about "the
"dogmas of a party which has always acknowl-
edged the possession of property as proof of
merit about privileged classes" "monopo-
LISTS" and the unfortunate poor men," We
should hail. with far more satisfaction than Fer
nando Wood, an act whereby the privileged class
Of legaized liquor sellers should be utterly abol-
ished, as it was until Fernando Wood aad
Democratic Court Of Appeals revived it. But how
base, how vilainous is the appeal made by our
model demagogue to the prejudices Of poverty, in
view Of the facts which true history Of this
Liquor controversy develops,
E--==
tba tata 80, nut