New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-11-18
PEOHIBITI0N IN KlNSlG.

On November = the State OF Kansas, by d.
rect vote OF the people, adopted an
amendment 20 It's Constitution forbddIng forever
the manufacture or sale ofiltoXicating liquors,
except for medicinal, mechanical or sci
on;iGc purposes. Thus this stalwart young
giant IF thc West takes its place
beside Blaine on the platform OF absolute pro
L.bidon. The results of this legislation will
DC watched with keen interest by every
one intelligent enough t. know that
the Temperance question is one
Of the great problems OF the eye.
Though the Prohibition act OF Kansas is
practically identical with that Of Maine,
the conditions under which it Will oper-
ate are different, in Ge2rce, II
hot in kind. Maine IS an old State,
with population comparatively fixed
IN its habits and depending for
prosperity more upon the deye'opucl; OF es-
taJlisEcd iadu~t,ios and the earnings OF
invested capital than upon the influx OF
new settlers ana the multiplication
of new nGu iIics. a letter from
Portland, recently Published in The
TRIBUNE, mentioned among the ar
gumeuts OF those who oppose he
Prohibition policy. Tie belief that
tie law prevents immigrtiou--iiat hon
est, industrious Germans. especially, viii
not move into a community where they
cannot obtain glass OF beer. There is doubt
less truth III this assertion. for The foreign
population of Maine is VIGOROUSLY small. If
ths argument, then, has weight in Maine,
State into which immigration, under
any law, would be comparatively small,
it is easy to understand with what solicltude
intelligent citizens may contemplate the proba-
bic effects of prohibition in Kansas. If under
conditions otherwise favorable, there Is
marked decrease of settlement If land APP
prcciates in value slowly instead of rapidly,
as in the past, If attempts to evade the law
add materially to litigation and in
crease in a large ratio the necessary eXpcndi-
tures for courts, an urgent opposition will in
ovitablY ehdcavor to Overturn the recent de-
libcrately expressed decision of the people.
OF course duIin- the campaign the opponents
of a pIohibitOry law in Kansas made the
most of the argument that it was unjust to
destroy capital invested in the man
ufacture sand sale of intoxicating liq- |
uOrs that men who Ind so in |
vested their money under the pro-
lection of the State mad acquired certain |
right to its continued protection, and that, |
aside from these considerations of justice, ex- |
pediency forbade any interference with their |
operations.
On the other side it was argued with |
equal carnestness, and, as the result |
proved, with greater success, that a |
majority of the people had |
a right to protect themselves against the ac-
evils of drunk enness, that a pro-
hlbitory law would attract to the State
the best class of immigrants, aud |
that the savings from temperance would
vastly outweigh the losses from pro-
hiDition. The people OF Kansas were
deeply stirred by this question, and the
adoption OF the constitutional amendment
has been followed by enthusiastic rejoicing
1t is not our purpose TO discuss at this time
the wisdom of the enactment, but to point
out briefly the considerations which Its pas
sage involves. Without doubt, the operation
Of the Maine law has been such as reasonably
10 satisfy the majority of the people of
hat State, and there is no serious diSpO-
,itiOn there III any party 10 attempt its re-
peal. The operation of similar law
lndcr very different conditions will he watched
with interest by the whole country.
|