Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes Co., O. [Ohio]) 1870-1895, 1874-05-21
LICENSE OR NO LICENSE,

ally desire to restrict the liquor traf-
fic and lessen its evils, but who does
not think that entire State prohibit
ton is attainable at this time, 1t is
a question of profound interest to
know how they should vote upon
the license question to be submitted
in connection with the new constl-
tuition. This question can be satisfac
torily answered only by clear un-
derstanding of precisely what is in
cluded in it, aud what Is to be lost
or gained by decision one way or
the other. Let us try and make
this plain. The following is the
proposed license section:
.SEc.-License to traffic in sprir-
itous, vinous, or malt'liquors, under
such regulations, restrictions and
limitations as shall be prescribed by
law, may be granted; but this sec
tion shall not prevent the General
Assembly from passing laws to re-
strain such traffic, and to compen-
safe the injuries resulting there
from"
If the majority vote aginst Ii
cense, then the following instead of
the above clause will be adopted:
sSEc.-No license to traffic in in
toxicating liquors shall hereafter be
granted in this State; but the Gen
eral Assembly may by law restrain
or prohibit such traffic, or may pro-
vide against evils resulting there
FROM"
If no provision on the subject, one
way or the other, were made in the
constitution, the Legislature would
undoubtedly possess the power to
grant license and, on the other hand
a larger power Of prohibition than
is given by the proposed license,
clauses. Nothing is gained, there
fore, for temperance, but on the 9TH
er hand, there is positive loss.
1. The power of local, as we'll as
State prohibition is lost. The diff
ference in the wording In the two
clauses shows this. In the license
clause the Legislature is authorized
to ''restrain," while in the ''no Ii
cense," clause the power to '.prohib-
it," as well as restrain, is given; and
express giving of the power to pro.
hibit, in one case, and the intention
al omission of it in the other, shows
that the power to prohibit, is in
; tended to be excluded, if the ii
cense clause is adopted.
! 2. In just SO far as the power t.
prohibit is denied, the liability un
der the Adair law, or any similal
law, is lessened; for person could
not be made liable in damages OF
account of las.tul sale.
On the other hand, if the no Ii
cense clause is adopted, the powe
to prohibit as well as restrain Is Civ
, en-; and it is under this power o
prohibition conferred by our pres
ent law upon villages and cities, tina
prohibitory ordinances have beel
passed, and the liqour traffic driver
out of a large number of the inte
rior towns in the State. The pro
posed license clause as ALREADY
T shown by shrewd and well advis
ed implication, takes away the loca
prohibition, and leaves every tow
in the State not only without pro
lection against the establishment
of saloons within their corporate
, limits, but does give protection tt
the saloons wherever established
Every community has to provide
for its own safety, and bear its owl
burdens, and to take away the pow
er of local prote,tio against one. o
the worst of evils, is an outrage tot
great to be commented upon will
patience under the live and vigor
Gus temperance sentiment noy
awakened and established. In
J large part of the State the saloon
are being suppressed, the liquo
traffic has been greatly reduced, ant
+ this with the enforcement of tn
l Adair law, is -affording large meas
ure of protection against the liquo
traffic and its evils.
The Waechter am Erie a pape
which openly represents the saloo
keeping interest, construes the pre-
posed license clause as we have in
:. dicated, and urges its adoption
claiming, in substance:
l. That the traffic in spirituou
liquors will receive constitutions
8 legal recognition.
II 2. That the sale of spirituou
liquors can no longer be prohibit
ed.
8. That the dealer in liquors viii
: have perfect protection.
A. The McConnellsville ordinanc
as far as it forbids absolutely tn
sale of liquors in sa looms, will b
repealed.
5. The Adair law will then onl,
be in force so far as it makes pei
sons responsible for damages result
ing from Wnlaacful sale. This con
firms the view we have taken as t.
the effect of the license clause, ant
shows that it is the liquor trati
which it is intended to protect, ant
net the public against its evils. o.
the other hand the adoption of tn
no license clause leaves US jus
, where we are now, with large de
gree of State restriction, and tn
posOer Of local prohibition unde
the municipal code. We certainl.
ought not to change for the worse.
We are aware that it is claimed
that under the proposed licens'