The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1873-01-14

lock gnt sequel to fowl Play.
CIDER LEGIsLArIoN.-The Lewiston Journal
in candid consideration of the cider question,
says in conclusion:
The practical question, therefore, in this cider
| matter, is not simply what our best and purest
men labor for and hope to see ultimately ex-
pressed in law, but to what extent will legisla-
ton be sustained by the people. So far as all
other lntoxlcants are concerned, it is clear
that our prohibitory laws are not ahead of the
average moral sense Of the people of Maine as
a whole.
They have reached snch point that it will
now be well for the friends of Temperance to let
them rest where they are for the present, and
bend their energies to elevating public senti-
ment; for it is upon this that we must largely
rely to secure the execution of laws in such d.
rections. But no thoughtful friend of temper
ance would for moment deem it wise to apply
the sweeping provisions of the law to even fer
mented cider. 1t never has been done, and
no one expects it until there is o most decided
change of feelings on the cider matter. 1t may
be said that it is inconsistent not to do so, but
no more inconsistent than scores of other most
useful statutes which go as far in the right di-
rectiOn as public sentiment will allow.
1t is not strange that there should be differ.
ence of opinion, even among men who have
the furtherance of the Temperance cause at
heart, as to how far it is wise to go in extend
ing the prohibtory principle to cider, Some
wise to Interfere with the sale of cider under
any circumstances. We do not coincide with
this view, although we recognize the fact that
many men of most excellent Judgment hold
this opinion-not because they personally do
not look upon it's sale under some circum-
stances as evil, but because they believe that the
majority of the people are not of that opinion.
Our own judgment is that majority of the
people would support the extension of the
prohibitory principle to the sale of cider by the
glass especially in drinking-houses and tippling
shops, because we believe that the moral sense
OF the public regards even cider tippling-shops
as not only unnecessary and injurious in their
influence, but also as largely kept simply as
cover for the sale of something stronger.
We regard it, however, as very unwise to
make any attempt to interfere by law with the
sale OF cider under any circumstances, simply
because We believe it would endaneer the whole
prohibitory system. If we were persuaded that
the average moral sense of the people would
not sustain the extension of the prohibitory
principle to the retailing of cider by the glass,
we should object to such legislation for the
same reason.
While our present light inclines as to the
course we have suggested it may be that the
method suggested by many of our best temper
ance men, is the wisest and most practicable in
order to reach the same end. This proposition
is in substance to declare that the provisions of
the law against drinking-houses and tippling
shops shall apply to the sale of any beverage
not expressly mentioned in the act, where the
court or jury shall find it to be Intoxicating
thus including the sale of fermented cider by
the glass. ~