The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1874-07-29
"BE JUST AND FEAR NOT!
RICHMOND,

victs committed In December 1873
under the Baxter law, with its local
prohibiting provision &C., there were
265 S4 polls, 1,4S7 saloons and 250
convicts committed Thus it will be
seen that while saloons increased six
times faster than the polls under
license law. under the Baxter law,
with its prohibitory feature of local
option &c, saloons decreased nearly
one third, pauperism and crime in
proportion.
"Take the State of Maine. In May
1851 her real prohibitory law was
passed. Immediately its salutary eff
fects were apparent. The traffic was
rapidly checked-poorhouses became
empty-houses of correction and jails
lost their inmates-industry and fru-
gality were everywhere manifest
The Mayor of Bangor. in his message
to the Council, April 1852, said On
the first of July when | gave notice
that l should enforce the law, 1O8
persons were selling liquor here; 20 Of
them have left the city. Of the re-
naming 50 not one sells openly. The
number of inmates in our almshouse
and house Of correction have been
vastly reduced. Similar testimony
was borne from all parts of the State.
In September 1855 however, by a
vast expenditure of money supplied
from New York, by various secret in
fuences, and an unsleeping organlza-
ton, the license men defeated the
prohibition party. Mr.. Barnes intro
duced very stringent license law in
to the legislature as substitute for
prohibition. What was the result?
'Distillers went to work again, drunk
enness and crime rapidly increased
| The evil results of this stringent IL
cense law were so fearfully apparent,
that in 1857 the Legislature elected
were almost unanimously in favor Of
prohibition. A prohibitory law was
again passed, and has been maintain
ed ever since. Writing of the effect
of that law after many years OF expc-
rience, the Hon. Woodbury. Davies Of
the Supreme Court, said: No observ-
ing man who has lived in this State
for 20 years and has had an opportu-
nifty to know the facts, can doubt that
the Maine Law has produced a hun
dred times more visible improvement
in the character, condition and pros
perity of our people, than any other
law that was ever enacted. Of our
400 towns and cities I am satisfied
that in more than 100, the law pre-
vents any sale of liquor whatever, as a
beverage. In at least 200 of them it
is sold only on the sly. just as in the
same towns there are persons guilty of
lewdness and other crimes. This
most conclusive testimony is confirm
ed by Senators Hamlin and Morrell,
Attorney General Frye and many
other leading men of the State.
Take New York as further proof
of the efficiency of prohibition over
license In April 1925 prohibitory
law was passed. In January 1856
Gov. Clark said in his message in ref
; erence to that law, notwithstanding
it has been subjected to an opposition
more persistent, unscrupulous and de-
fiant than is often incurred by an act
of legislation, it has still, outside our
! large cities, been generally obcyed.
The influence is visible in a marked
, diminution of the evils it sought to
/ remedy. In 1854 the committals ior
/ offenses of drunkenness were in sew
eral counties 1860. In 1855 under
the prohibitory law in the same coun-
e ties they fell to 2,S9S
t "On the 25th Of March 1856 the Su-
: preme Court of New York declared
:. the law void License followed What
n was the result? The Albany Morning
I Times, an anti prohibitory paper
e wrote, "The penitentiary is filling up
v The number of prisoners is greater
q than it has been during the past Is
!. months The experience of M2ssa
r. chusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island
J. and many other States, is strikingly
" corroborative of Indiana, Maine ant
e New York.
% I'VE cannot turn to a single STATE
4 in the Union but the fact stares u
= square in the teeth, that where licens,
t. has obtained, the consumption of in
toxicants, with intemperance and al
= its attendant evils, have increaset
,e much faster than the increase of popu
e. lation, conclusively demonstrating
g. that license, as a general thing, doe
5r not restrain, but rather facilitates tn
es traffic.
10 I'm England also with her restrict
h i've license law during the 81 years
i. from 1871 to 1872, the consumption Q
40 liquor increased from Els, 797 900 t
~ f13l ,601 400. As consequence, tn
e. Iapprehensions for Drunkenness ros
to from "a, ,745 in 1863 to 151 0S4 in 1S7:
In II years their poor and police rate
he increased so per cent. In 90 yeal
o. their lunacy increased 200 per cen
av In II years their convictions for erin
ce increased 65 per cent In 26 yeal
,st the mortality among males increase
62 per cent What a testimony fol
In sooth to license system, which tn
to Cincinnati Gazette is SO persistent
er advocating! Who can refuse to recos
or nize such evidence as this?
wv Can more conclusive evidence |
ne required by any unbiased mind
his prove the great superiority of prohib
Ia ton over license? In every instan,
en- where prohibition has superseded !
M cense, it has never failed to check IL
,al traffic and lessen the fearful evils
m intemperance. While, on the 9th,
to. hand in every case where license h:
to supplanted prohibitory law, the ira
ter fic has largely increased, and the pu
it lie evils resulting therefrom have BET
vastly augmented.
ad WIN sucH laets peioie US, tne
ire would really seem to be only OF
ad course open for the true friends
he temperance in Ohio to pursue, in re
1at erence to the question of license or
st. license. That course is clearly al
ee. unhesitatingly to vote no liccnse.'
nj. But the Cincinnati Gazette say
nle that voting license does not necess
wv. rily mean the enactment of licen
w3 law What then does it mean? Do
lis it mean prohibition? If it does tn
it indeed Talleyrand was correct VIII,
&C. he said, that.the purpose of laneua
DIV is to disguise our thoughts