The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1875-02-03

SO. pa uperism 100, and persons actu
ally 10 prison 220 per cent. 30 tina
aide By side With the product of in
foxicatien decreasing IL times taste
than the increase OF population, in
sanity and idiocy increased twice q
fast; pauperism nearly six times an,
crime nine times as fast. | ask tn,
Senator's how long under judiciouS
we'll regulated license law az this rat
will it take to make the State on,
grand halaeaust of pauperis n !. fcrim'
and insanity? l deter to gentlemen
who are adept in arithmetic to caicu
late.
That pauperism and crime Obtain
Just in proportion TO the increase 0
drinking saloons, there Is surely n,
gentleman on this floor viii undertak,
to deny. In the q counties of thi.
State containing the largest number O
licensed saloons, the mum Der OF voter.
is a279O. There Is one saloon TO ey
cry n voters. and one convict to every
1870 voters. The criminal and paupel
expenses are 50 q per voter. In the
q counties where there are no licensed
saloons, with 81 $50 voters, the pau
per and criminal expenses are 81 S.
per voter, not one-half the amount o.
the . counties with most saloons
Thus establishing the fact beyond al
cavil or controversy. that Just in pi O.
portion TO the increase OF saloons. is
the increase in pauperfsm and crime
So much for the influence upon the
drink traffic and society of a judicious
well-regnlated license law, a law to $
PROTECT THE DEAR PEOPLE
and increase the school fund.- 81
Turn We now to ascertain what eff
feet the local option feature of the
present law has had upon the drink
traffic, and its results upon society
Our present local option law was APP
proved on the 9th of February, 1873
In December, 1872, under the full
sway of the judicious licence law.
there was in the State Pol $50 polls,
2.094 licensed saloons and 345 con
yicted criminals in that year In De-
eember, 1873, when the local option
law had been barely in operation ten
months during which time, as Gov.
Hendricks says, 1T encountered de-
termined hostility on the part of those
e engaged in the liquor business, and
when many of the officers of the law
virtually stood in the way of its exc
cution, we lind that although the polls
of the State had run up to 265,S74.
being nearly 1000 more than in 1872,
the number of saloons had fallen to
,4S7. nearly one third less; the num-
Der of conyicts committed had fallen
to $50, more than twenty-five per cent.
less, and the number of counties with
out saloons had run up TO 23. two and
n half times as many as in 1872, under
the license law. n, Ts- ~-z4r5
But this is not all; drunkenness had
very largely decreased. According to
reports, made by truthful and relia BILE
persons residing in the respective
counties reported. it appears that UP to
January, 1874, in II months, out of
IS counties heard from, only one re-
ported it doubtful as to the decrease
10 drunkenness, while the rest report
ed a decrease as follows: One, 100
per cent; one. so; two, IS; one, 80;
80; eight, So. and the bal
ance range from to % per cent, and
slight" to considerable - If;w e.
Thus it will be seen by these stats
tics, that from 1860 to 1870, under a
udicions, well-regulatcd license law,
the manufacture of intoxicants in
creased twelve times faster than the
and, as legitimate result,
insanity and idiocy increased double
the ratio of population. pauperism
nearly six times, and crime nine times
as fasii whereas, on the other hand,
IN less than year after the passage of
The local option law, and that, too,
with an increase of nearly 1900 polls,
saloons decreased one third, drunken
ness 80 per cent. and convicts com
mitted decreased more than. % per
cent. i ask the Senator'S to ponder
oyer these facts, and give them due
before they seek to
supplant local option with a license
law. And yet, in the face of these
facts, we hear the cry, that local
option is a failure a failure Yes;
Il has failed to disappoint the friends
If humanity! IL has failed to, please
saloon keepers, brewers and distil-
ers I" II this law has utterly failed
IN its purpose, / ask. how comes it
that those who traffic in alcoholics are
50 bitterly opposed to it? That they
are opposed to it we know from the
declaration of Governor Hendricks,
or he says, 1t has encountered de-
.ermined hostility on the part of those
in the liquor business" This
S the strongest proof its efficiency
would the saloon keeper be SO fear
FULLY anxious to repeal failure
With these facts before us-facts
which no sophistry or logic can gain.
say-can we, who profess to be here to
egislate, not in the interets OF certain
lass Of men, but for the well being of
he people at large-ean We vote TO re-
oeal a law which has worked so bene-
and In its stead enact a Law
shich sad experience Iroves to, be
earthly opposed to the public good ?
fhe cry comes up from all parts of
he State that the b~e t.s@@s ~
TAXEs ARE OPPRESSIVE. Il
hat relief must he had, for the people
AN bear the burden NO longer. When
he people are asking for bread, as it
Fere. will you give them q stone in
he shape OF passing license law
Fhiel, is sure. to increase their bur
lens Whatever other Senators may
10, so far as l am concerned. i can
hot. and will not disregard the cries
II patient and magnanimous people
seeing then that this local option law
las tended so much to restrain the
uinous traffic in drink. and to largely
decrease drunkenness and its evils.
yhy seek to repeal it? Why not sus-
a in it-strengthen and make It more
Elective by restoring the ninth sec.
ion, increasing the penalty for selling
without a permit, and. IL the people
demand license fee, | care not how
,eavy, why let them have IT, But in
tead of using that money to defile the
reasnry OF the commoia school fund.
.se. II In huildin1 and fnnndi,,n q.