The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1880-12-24
Prohibition i'm Kansas.

On November 2 the State Of Kansas,
by direct vote of. the people, adopted
an amendment to its Constatutton for
bidding forever the or sale
of intoxicating liquors, except for med
icinal, mechanical or scientific purposes.
Fhus this stalwart young giant Of the
West takes it's place beside Maine on
the platform Of absolute prohibition.
The results of this legislation will be
watched with keen interest by. every
one intelligent enough to know that
the Temperance question is one of the
great problems of the age.
Though the Prohibition act OF Kan
sas is practically identical with that of
Maine. the conditions under which it
will operate are different, In degree, Il
with population comparatively fixed
in its habits and depending for prosper
ity more upon the development of es-
tablished industries and the earnings OF
invested capital than upon the influx
of new settlers and the multiplication
of new industries. A letter from Port
land recently published In the Tribune,
mentioned among the arguments OF
those who oppose the Prohibition poll
CIV, the belief that the law prevents Inn
migration - that honest, industrious
Germans, especially, will not move into
q community where they cannot attain
q glass of beer. There is doubtless
truth in this assertion, for the foreign
population of Maine is nOtOriOusly small.
IF this argument, then, has weight In
Maine, q State into which immigration,
under any law, would be comparatively
small, it is easy to understand with
what sOlicitude intelligent citizens may
contemplate the probable effects ofpro-
hibitiOlf in Kansas. Ifunder conditions
otherwise favorable, there is q marked
decrease of s0ttlement if land appreci-
ates in value Islowly instes bf rapidly
as in the past, il attempt. evade the
law add materially to litigation and in
crease in a large patio the necessary ex-
penditures for courts, an urgent OPPOSE
ton will inevitably endeavOr to over.
run the recent deliberately expressed
decision of the people. Of course dur
ing the campaign the opponents of a
prOhibitory law in Kansas made the
most of the argument that it was unjust
to destroy capital invested in the man.
ufacture and sale of Intoxicating liquors;
that men who had so invested their
money under the protection of the State
had acquired a certain right to its con-
ued tinprOtection, and that, aside from
these considerations of justice, expedi-
ency forbade any interference with
their operations.
On the other side it was argued with
equal earnestness, and, as the result
proved, with greater success, that a
majority of the people had right to
protect themselves against the acknowl.
edged evils of drunkenness, that q pro
hibitory law would attract to the State
the best class of immigrants, and that
the savings from temperance would
vastly outweigh the losses from prohi.
bition. The people of Kansas were
deeply stirred by this question, and the
adoption of the constitutional amend.
ment has been followed by enthusiastic
rejoicing. 1t is not our purpose to dis
cuss at this time the wisdom Of the
enactment, but to point out briefly the
considerations which its passage in.
wolves. Without doubt, the operation
of the Maine law has been such as rea'
sonahly to satisfy the majority of the
people of that State, and there is nc
serious disposition there In any party
to attempt its repeal. The operation OF
a similar law under very different con.
ditions will be. watched with interest
by the whole country.-N. Y. Tribune