The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1881-07-30
SATURDAY MORNING, JULY 80.
BY TELEGRAPH.
MARAN.ACOOK.
Second Day of the Tenn perance
Campmeeting.
GOV. DINGLEY'S ADDRESS ON THE
RESULTS OF PROHIBITION.

than might otherwise be expected. A special
train arrived from Portland at 8 so bringing ex-
Governors Perham aud Dingley, Mrs. Mason,
G. W. V. T., and others.
The meeting opened this morning at 1890,
J. X. Osgood, presiding, making the opening
remarks. Hon. T. R. Simonton, G. W. Chief
Templar, delivered an excellent speech upon
total abstinence, opposing DIR. Crosby's theory
upon scriptural grounds and st rongly advocat-
ing temperate manhood.
This afternoon, Ex-Governor Dingey deliver
ed an address on Prohibition, and what it has
contributed to the mitigation of the evils Of
dram-shops in Maine," of which the following
is a comprehensive synopsis
Gov. Dingley introduced his address by
brief resume of the gigantic evil arising from
the sale and use of Intoxicating liquors as
beverage-evils admitted by ALL When we
come to remedies for these evils, there is gen.
eral agreement that moral agencies of some
kind must be our most important reliance, al
though even here there is difference of opin-
ion as to whether moral Suasion shall plead
simply for the use of the intoxicating cup mod
erately, or against its use altogether ques-
ton which he did not propose now to discuss
The phase of the question of remedies as
signed to the speaker for discussion. neces-
states an inquiry first as to whether law can
reinforce and supplement moral agencies in the
treatment of the drink problem; and if SO,
what shall be the character of the legal rein
forcement
The common and strongest possible stat 3
ment of the negative answer to the first que
ton is, that linen cannot be made temperate
or virtuous by law, but that virtue must come
from within" This statement is only half the
truth. 1t is true that virtue come from ooithin
1. e. by influences addressed to the heart; but
it is equally true that vice may come from
D1ttout. To promote personal virtue is prim-
arily the work of moral and religious agencies.
But to hinder the solicitations of external vice
is the work of the law maker and statesman.
Moral suasion and legal protection are har-
monious and inseparable remedies for the evils
ofiintemperance.s We recognize the aid that law
can give in promoting virtue when we supple
ment moral instruction with laws prohibiting
gambling-paces and house of ill-fame. I'm
less law can aid in mitigating the evils of the
dram-shop, there is no justification for license
laws or any other form of restriction on the
liquor traffic There is danger of overestimat-
ing as well as Understanding the assistance
that protective legislation cali render, but the
fact that it can aid is practically acknowledged
by all.
The practical question then is, "Will legis-
lation based on the Drohibitory principle be
more effective in mitigating the evils of the
dram-shop, than that based on the license and
reg lative idea ?
Gov. Dngley said there are some theoretical
objections to prohibition, which should be can
didy considered. 1. 1t is objected that prohi-
bition is based on the idea that the sale of Ii
quors as a beveragescan be absolutely prevent
ed, and mas much as it does not do this, it is
failure. Prohibition is not based on this idea,
said the speaker but on the theory that a
dram shop is SO serious danger to a commu-
nifty that the law should set on it not seal of
appreciation, but seal of condemnation
Prohibition rests on precisely the same prin-
ciple that laws forbidding gambling-pl and
brothels do, viz: that such dens are public
nuisances, and should be prohibited by law
The fact that such laws do not extirpate secret
dens of this character, does not stamp the laws
as failures Laws against theft and even MUIR
der do not and cannot extinguish the crimes
against which they are aimed. The true test
of any law is not that it absolutely prevents
the evil against which it is aimed (that is i'm.
possible), hut that it does all that any law can
do to mitigate it.
2. II is objected to prohibition that it only
transforms the open dram-shop into the secret
GROCERY, with an increase rather than de-
crease of the dram-shop evils by the change.
Ii this objection is sound, it is as fatal to the
provisions of license law so far as they prohibit
sales on Sunday, and late at night, &C., as to
prohibtory laws. 1t is fatal also ito laws pro-
hibiting gambling-places and houses of ILL
fame. But the truth is that vicious practice are
gagged to great extent iby the opportunities
OF indulgence. The more difficult it is to sell
the fewer will engage in tho traffic. The
more difficult it is to buy liquor the less there
will be drunk. A secret GROCERY known only
to the initiated, is much less dangerous than
an open one, which the State has certified to
be respectable" Outlawed vice is much less
dangerous than legalized vice.
). 1t is objected to prohibition that it fosters
hypocrisy and perjury. But so does license; so
does any law that prohibits and Furnishes pam
prohibition does this more than license, it is
only because the former interferes with the
dram-seller more than the latter.
4. 1t is objected that prohibition properly,
interferes with the right of the citizen to buy
and use what he pleases. The law interferes
in terms with the seller alone, and is based on
the Judgment of the State that dram shop is
danger to the community. The slight, in
direct interference with the liberty of the cti-
xens, is for the be neft of society, as a whole
No good citizen will complain that he is OBJ
liged to buy imported liquors in the original
package, or to send to States where the traffic
is authorized by law; if by this slight personal
Inconvenience he can mitigate the evils of the
dram shop. -
5. AS all laws restraining the liquor traffic,
whether prohibitory or license, have for their
ultimate object the diminution of the consump-
ton of Intoxicating liquors, or in other words
the improvement of the drinking habits of
people, it is essential that their educational, as
well as protective influences be in harmony
with that end. Prohibition is in harmony with
this object; license is not, because whatever the
law authorizes and licenses, is to that extent
encouraged and made respectable. The NOR
atty of no people can be maintained, above
the morality of their laws.
b. The correctness of the prohibitory princi-
pie Is further shown by the fact that the only
features OF license laws, which in any effec-
tive manner restrain the liquor traffic, viz, the
Sunday and late at night closing provisions
follow the theory of prohibition, and not of
license.
Z. The fact that liquor dealers always and
everywhere oppose prohibition and favor lic-
ense instead. is a significant testimony that the
former interferes much more seriously with
their traffic than the latter.
III. But the true test of the merits of prohibit
ton and license, is to be found only in the COM
parative practical workings of each. License
has been tried for more than two hundred
years, and we know exactly its fruits. Prohibi-
to" has had a fair trial only in the state of
Maine since the close of the war. What have
been its fruits in this state?
1. Prohibition has closed every distillery and
brewery in Maine. This is admitted. Some
think this a loss; but those who hold that the
capital, grain and labor employed in making
what will injnre the community, can be devot-
ed more advantageously to industries which
benefit state, believe the change gain.
2. Prohibition has not simply transformed
the open dram shops seen in license commune
ties into secret groggeries in Maine without any
dimunition of them. 1t has largely reduced
their number. 1t would be gain if the traffic
had been driven under ground for this would
hide the temptation from those who were not
seeking it. But it has done more, the census
OF 1870 land the census of 1880 will give SINH
lar fgures) showed that there is one dram shop
in the United States to every 236 inhabitants
In the same proportion, Maine should have
2,75O. In 1888. according to the reliable sta
tistics of Secretary Pond, this state under lie
ense had one dram-shop to every 225 inhabi-
tants.Now it is not believed there are here over
200 dram shops, mainly secret, outside of a few
places. Nobody places them more than 1000,
and those mainly in cities and the larger vii
lagos. Nearly all the secret dealers prefer to
pay the small United States tax rather than
run the heavy penalties of the United States
law. But only $50 paid tax last year, and
zoo of these were drug stores, which are oblig-
ed to pay the tax in the prosecution of their
legitimate business.
That there are not one-half of the number of
secret and open dram shops in Maine proper
tionately, that there are open dram shops in
license states, is shown by a more critical ex-
animation. The average for license states
would give 40 dram shops in Oxford county
but it is doubtful if there are actually %. An
droscoggin would have 200 but there are not
80. Cumberland would have 800, but notwith-
standing the chief commercial city of the state
is in that county, she has not or had not up to
last January, more than half this number.
Franklin would have 80, but l am informed
she has less than dozen. More than half the
towns OF Maine have not even a secret grog-
gerry. Durham, for example, which in 1888
had licensed dram Shops has not had single
dram ShOn for RaadGa16 bad