The Highland weekly news. [volume] (Hillsborough [Hillsboro], Highland County, Ohio) 1853-1886, 1874-08-06
LICENSE ORNO LIOENSE?''
THAT is THE QUESTION.
Letter from Hon. William
Baxter IF In diana. TO Rev. j.
w. ClOkey, of MiddleIOwn.
Ohio.

appeal to you for some light on the
working of the Baxter Law. The
Cincinnati Gazette is confusing ou1
temperance people, and making many
of them believe that the license sys
tenn is the true one to restrain the
abuse of liquor in Ohio. So far as
your observation goes, what feature
Of the Baxter law is it that does the
temperance work in Indiana? Is il
when the option goes for 1icense?"
Statistics all through Indiana
show that, on account of the great
stringency of the law (the saloon
keepers say it is prohibitory in q
roundabout way,) the evils resulting
from the liquor traffic have been di-
minished. But the most decisive ef
feet for good has been accomplished
in those towns and counties where
the local-option provision has been
used in .fa0or ofprohi6itioa. In In
dianapols, Evansville, Terre Haute,
and some other cities where the To-
ca[option clause has been used in
favor of granting permits, the i'm
provement has been comparatively
small; whereas in the counties OF
Randolph, Henry, Grant, Wayne,
Hendricks, and many others, where
the local-option clause has gone
anainst the granting Of permits, or,
in other words, for prohibition, the
greatest good has resulted.
In answer to the interrogotary,
"When you framed that law, did
you include the liberty to decide fol-
license because you have any faith in
license asa temperancemeasure? No!
for I was well aware, that all license
laws are at best deceptive, injurious,
and difficult of enforcement. NV
reasons for inserting the localoption
part were these: In Indiana we
were suffering under the terrible
curse CT license law. I went to the
Legislature determined, if possible,
to get some improvement on that
law; but very soon found it was ut
terly impossible to cary through q
prohibitory law. I therefore con
cluded to try the next best thing,
namely, 'Elocal option so that when
ever the people of any ward, town.
or township were in favor of prohibi
ton, they could invoke that power
In those places where the people
were in favor of permitting the traf-
fic, the law is so charged with pen
alties that it is precarious business
to sell proftably.
The result has proved just as ]
expected. Wherever the people have
decided not to grant permits, the
reformation has been most crafty
ing. Wherever they have determin
ed in favor of permits, the penalty
clauses have, to some extent, re
strained the evils of the traffic; but
there is much less reformation thar
in the prohibitory localities. There
can be no stronger proof of the vast
superiority of prohibition over that o
license, than has been developed il
this State by the localoption part o
our law.
Touching thy question as to thu
''relative working of license and pro
hibition in the different States"
may remark, that all the reliable evi
dence is in favor of prohibition, anc
against license.
Take the case of our State. Il
June, 1855, prohibitory law cam,
into operation. From June to De
cember previous, Q854,) sevel
months under license, the records O
the court show seventy-one commit
tails for crime. From June to De
cember of 1855, seven months unde
prohibition, only ffty-nine commit
tails. After the prohibitory law ha
been in operation seven months, tn
Supreme Court of the State declare
it unconstitutional on a mere tecE
nical quibble. It therefore cease
operation. Mark what followed
From June to December, 1856, seve
months after prohibition had ceased
the committals ran up to ninety.
Again, from 1868 to 1872, we ha
in Indiana license law. In order fo
a person to procure license unde
that law, he had to prove o goo
character before the county con
missioners; show he was prope
person to be intrusted with licens
pay fee, and even then was r
strained from selling on Sunday an
to minors, etc. So that is VIII;
many people would call stringer
license law. Well, what was tt
effect of this license law? Did 1t +
strain the traffic, or the evils resultin
therefrom? Not bit of it. It rat
erformed a shield for the dealer to p
his unholy traffic without let or hi
drance. During those ten years
stringent license, the number OF S
looms increased six xtimes faster thu
: the polls. AS a consequence, paupe
ism increased six times, and Grin
nine times, faster than the increa
t of polls. Whereas, in the State
Maine, with prohibition, from 18'
l to 1872, her criminals actually q
. creased moro than one-half-fro
two hundred and four to one hu