The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1867-03-16
For the Daily Press.



Grent Names.
Mr.. EpITon:- Your correspondent TINS
morning criticises the manper IN wmch the
witnesses AGAINST prohibition in massachusetts,
have bean snoken of by some newspaper wri-
tors r, NAV he that this criticism is Just
nj there are some facts that should be consid-
ored before even "denunciations" should be de-
nounced. sa-1=--4-
1. The evils resulting from the liquor traffic
are appalling They meet the eye and ear in
every place. The suffering, and sorrow. and
crime that directly flow from this trade can
never hal1 be told The eoa is admitted. What
is the remedy?
License" has been tried for centuries. Its
failure has been proved by an experiment tried
SO long that the memory of man can scarcely
find its beginning.
rrohlplnon' is now on trial. Againsta fu-
rlous and INSCRIPTIONS opposition, it has stood
tor the little period of fifteen years,--sometimes
receding, sometimes advancing. Admitting
thatit is an experiment, who cannot see that it
cannot be tested in the brief span of few
years? And yet distinguished men" would
have us believe that, as an experiment, it has
been fully tried! .-... .... 80. t..f....
2. In this controversy, there are two parties,
directly opposed to each other Nearly all the
dctiue temperance men are for prohibition.
All the rumsellers in the country are againstit
Many men take no part in the controversy
But these "highly respectable" men in Massa-
chusetts, who have testified against prohibit
ton, by so doing enter the lists, and put them
selves, on this question, by the side of rtnselers;
using the same arguments; holding the same
opinions; asking for the same thing. 1t Is not
"denunciation" to state this fact. Andsif such
men lind their position unpleasant, 1t is Of
their o,cn choosing. , ..,a.. &
3. Especially have they no reason to COM
plain, when it is remembered that they volta-
tdrily come forward to aid the liquor dealers
in their struggle to overthrow the prohibitory
law. Ministers, lawyers, doctors, editors, pro-
fessors, all put their public characters, and
high social position into the contest, in fapor
of the liquor dealers, in moveme emit originated
and supported by them, against the main body
of temperance men, This, also, is simple fact.
Nor is it varied by the fact that these men
are reputed TO be the friends of temperance .
wants their testimony, and they know it.
With this question in issue, and the lines thus
drawn, if such men see fit to go into the fight,
and take sides with the rumseller, they have
no right to complain that their names are pub
lished in the muster rolls. The maxim 'snosci-
tar a sociis" still is current among men. -
A. The testimony of these men, on the cues
ton an controversy, is of no value. The eva is
admitted; and the question is one of remedy.
Hon. shall the liquor traffic be stopped These
men have never engaged in the work OF trying
to stop it; and they have no practical knowl-
edge on the subject. And the simple truth
may as well be told; except partially, many of
them do not acdnt it stopped. They do not pro
fess to want it stopped. The Harvard profess
sors, who differ from European chemists in be-
lieving alcohol to be good as "food," partake of
it as SUCH They, and Governor Andrew, and
other men of that class, want grocers, and res
taurant and hotel keepers, to sell it as food, or
drink. After DR.. Chickering preached a tenn
perance sermon in the Old South Church, Rev
DR.. Blagden followed it with sermon in fayor
Of moderate drinking. 1t is perfectly well
known that the upper classes in Boston and
Cambridge drink liquors freely as beverage.
To state this fact is not "denouncing" the men.
Mr. Sumner furnishes his table with rare old
wines, and all the papers in the country speak
of it. On some subjects his opinion would be
of great weight, but he does not come forward
as witness, pretending to know the best way
to put down the liquor traffic. And if other
Boston gentlemen, including the M D. Is, the
d. DIS, and the professors, had been as reti-
cent, they would not have been exposed to crit
icism. But when they publicly announce their
opinions, backed by high social and profession
al positions, upon question of suppressing
the traffic in liquors, the fact that they them
selves use liquors, not merely as medicine
but as a beverage, is a Legitimate argument"
on the opposite side. Such men are not in ia
Dor of suppressing the traffic Whether in
Boston, or Portland, if they are modest, they
will say little about temperance. And if they
persist in offering their advice, it is perfectly
fair to place their practice over against their
opinions. So at least it seems to one who is in
favor OF i $50 lHo PROHIBITION.