, 1873-05-25

tho community he expresses himself IN taEor
OF any plan calculated to check intempcrance;
and he believes in the right OF the
people to regulate their local affairs in
such manner rs they deem to be for
their welfare. But he believes that the Local.
Option bill is q limitation of their right to do
this. Tho Supreme Court Of Nsw York has held
that ale, beer, and cider are to be classed with
intoxicating drinks, and, therefore, under the
Local-optio bill, the people would have to vote
for the prohibition of ale, beer, and cider they
desired to prohibit the sale Of whisky, brandy and
other alcoholic drinks. GOV. Dix points out that
there is q very large end growing class Of people
who believe that a1o, beer, and cider are rather
safeguards against the vice Of intemperance than
promoters Of it.. He evidently believes so him
self, though lie does not say 10. But ho holds
that the necessary prohibition Of these malt
drinks in q community which desired to prohibit
the sale OF spirituous liquors constrains q FREQ
expression Of opinion at the polls. It might be
that those who would vote for prohibiting the
sale Of alcoholic drinks, if ale. beer, and cider
could be exempted, would refuse to vote for
prohibition that should. include these drinks.
Gov. Dir does not eay that the Leg
islature ought to make an exception
IN favor Of ole, beer, and cider, but he says that
the law should hare been framed in such q
manner aB to leave each community free to de-
eide whether it would prohibit the sale OF epiritu-
ous liquors alone, and tolerate malt drinks, or
prohibit them al, or refuse to prohibit any Of
them. There were other points Of objection
which Gov. Di1 made to the bill, but this is the
only one Of general interest.
When the bill first passed the New York LegiB-
islature, it received G5 votes in favor OF it.
When the vote was taken on passing it
over the Govornor's Veto it received but
So votes. This difference would indicate that
Gov. Dix's reasoning had made favorable i'm
preston on part Of the Legislature, since tho
nounced his action and made the fight, after the
veto, in order to have their record as strong as
possible. Gov. Dix went so far as to say that
the bill, as it passed, YVES more likely to promote
the evils it Tas intended to check than to remove
them. This feature Of the case, outside of all
reference to the doctrine Of Local Options,
should commend itself to the attention Of
everybody who is giving any consideration to
tho policy of enforced temperance. The ques-
tion is whether the general and unrestricted uso
Of ale. beer, cider, and native wines (Which will
not into1icate unless, as GOV. Dix says they are
taken in uncomfortable quantites) is not moro
likely to limit the vice Of intemporance than it
the crusade against spirituous liquors is made to
prohibit them. Also This question is OF i'm
portanco whether there is an issue Of prohibition
or not. II ale beer, cider, and native.
wines may be made active temperance
agents by disp1acing the common American
habit Of taking strong drinks, as many people
are coming to boieye who would not formerly
listen to such doctrine, then it is certain that
there should be political, Legislative, social
movement against these agencies. This is about
what Gov. Dix meant in his..veto Of the Local
Option bill as it Was passed.