Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1875-10-27
The Law and the Logic OF IL.
NJ REv. II. MILLER.


Liquor men, wholesale and retail dealers
maintain that the suppression of the traffic
by legislative enactment would be usurpa.
tion of authority on the part Of the govern
ment, and an unjust infringement of the
rights Of citizens. But the license laws, as
they now exist embody, assume and assist
the prohibition principle. To license is to
permit by grant of authority, to remove
legal restraint by grant of permission.
The power to grant includes the power to
refuse; the power to license includes the
power to prohibit; TO remove restraint is 10
admit restraint before it was removed.
Every man who petitions for a license adj
mits this by his act; every grog-seller who
pays fine admits this by his act. The
very word, license, proves the bestowment of
a privilege by the legislature which it might
have withheld. Each license law proclaims
the power of total prohibition.
No man ever had natural and inaliena-
ble right to sell grog to his neighbors. 1t is
no where to be found in the bill of rights.
All will admit that it is by legislative per-
mission, and if so, it can refuse permission.
No man will deny the power of the legisa-
ture to license. Whoever admits this, grants
its power to prohibit. These powers are CO.
existent it possesses both, or neither.
Prohibition by law is no new thing-lot-
teries are not licensed, they are prohibited.
Gambling houses are not licensed, but pro-
hibited. Unwholesome provisions are not
licensed, but prohibited. Even travel is in
terdcted, where public health requires it,
by quarantine laws.
The constitution was ordained and estab-
lished to "promote the general welfare" and
states and Incorporated boroughs and cities
daily exercise and enforce this wholesome
power. Prohibition is self-defence, and in
herent in all governments. The principle Of
prohibition is old as the common law, and
its exercise and application, in a hundred
forms, coeval with our civil institutions.
1t is only the traffic that is prohibited
there is no interference with individual
rights or personal habits, for with prohibi-
tion, if man chooses to keep poison in his
home, no human law can prevent him. Each
mans house is his castle still.
But the moral restraints of home are
stronger than law. II is not at home that men
ruin themselves by dissipation; for that mel
anchoy purpose they always go elsewhere.
Where some are licensed, all will sell. Pre-
vention is easier than punishment. The IL
cense laws lead men into temptation, and
then punish them for yielding TO it. What
would you think of a parent who treated his
child, or n master who would treat his serv-
ant thus ? In mercy to the fral, let the
temptation be removed.
The legislature might as well attempt to
regulate the explosive nature of gunpowder,
after the spark has been applied, as to regu-
late the traffic, or the effect it produces.
The license is the spark the traffic may be
abolished, the habit restrained, but neither
can be regulated
Prohibition makes no distinctions of per-
sons, causes no comparisons, kindles no
heartbreakings, treats all men alike, is aimed
at the thing, removes temptation, is Impair.
tial, and emanates from the people