The Portland daily press., 1879-02-22
"remperance''-In The Argus,

The Argus Of the 2lst has an article signed
"Temperan cs", criticizing an article of mine in
the PRESS of day or two before. DOM think
the minority of the Beer and Cider Commit
tee" can bs helped at all by the defense of
Temperance" or any other. They put their
names to statements that we're shOckiugly and
g.sriugy false, as every intelligent man
knows.
Bot come to my own defense from the crit
icisms Of Temperance" the Beer
and Cider Committee tol0ok after their own de-
fense in their own way. "rempsranco" repre-
sents me as saying If my own knowledge that
''the year prior to the enactment of the Maine
Law, one caaal boat on the G. & o. canal made
one trip to Portland and back each week, car
rying at every trip not less than from 10 to 30
barrels and from to 10 puncheons of rum into
Gu CUMBERLAND county,"
Now did not say that, but expressly stated
that was told 80 by man who was a canal
boatmau, and the word printed county" in
my article was written country Aud | did
not say Mr.. Charles Farley had wine factory
but wire factory. The liquors taken up the
canal we're widely distribu led through all the
country, from Naples, Bridgton, Centre Bridg-
ton. North Bridgton ana Harrison. Traders
Hampshire used to come to these points for
their loads, and distributed them very widely.
l am not at all concerned to prove that the Ca
nal boatman's story was literally true. 1 gave
it as had it. The only material point was
aud ia to show that the quantity of liquor taken
into the country bsfore the Maine Law was
very great, whereas no W the quantity taken in
to that region is very small
But ''Temp erance" the quantity figured up
BY him as taken up the canal was enormous,
md har ipy hn hna uv,Sc ofnr nanld
not bs true. The quantity taken up the canal
he estimates at $50, 460 gallons-for the rum
ming season, and he seems to think the people
could not drink SO much. l have no expert
ence in that matter, and my opinion is not
of much value, but appeal directly to the ex.
perleuce and observation Of Item perance' aud
ask him how much is q fair daily allowance?
He ought not to judge entirely by his ewn
experience, because a quantity that would lay
a non-worker on his back in Centre street with
hot summers sun pouring into his face, aud
the flies running into and out OF his open
mouth, would not affect hard-working farm
er. Rum in those days was very cheaO-some-
times as low as 20 cts. gallon, and % Cts. and
80 cts.-so that fluid was regular drink on q
very large scale.
But the point of my article in the PRESS did
not at all depend upon the literal accuracy of
the boatm ans story. An allowance of one half
or even more, for exaggeration may be mace,
without touching the Doi0t of my article,
W0lc0 was 10 snow C1at enormous 1antt6teS OF
lquor formerly went into the in error of the
Sac BY every avenue OF Communication,
where none goes now, or very little if any. On
every leading road, c1uotry teams, rar-ly one
without hogsbeaa or Two and some barrels of
run; all over the State IL was So; up the < en-
nebec, the P-nobscot. the St Crolx-ragular
streams of rum, where now very little if any
go-s. Ooen ram shops all over the State,
wholesale and retail-where no such shops are
now.
The beer and cider committee in their
Report say that ''the consumption (of liquors)
ia as large" now as before the law.
The Committee put their names, In saying
that, Knowingly or Ignorantly to tremendous
falsehood, and it is one all in the interests of
the worst class of the people and of all that is
low, bad and vile in society. am not willing
that shameful statement should pass without
rebuke. And even Temperance has not
word to say in its defense. Governors of the
State. the Executive couucl, Senators apd Rep
resentatives in Congress, mayors, judges,
clergy men, have publicly certified that in
their opiulon the quantity of liquor sold 10
the State now, is not one tenth as large as
before the law, and in saying that they we're
far within the mark. NEAL Dow.