Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1881-01-27
Wilmington, Thursday, Jan. II, 1881
Temperance Agitators aud Prohib-
itory Legislation.

medistely before them,to understand thet,
token rs whole, they create the
to our expression of which he
objects, and we feel bound to say to him
frankly that the names be cites do not 20
remove the impression from
our mind as he seems to think they will
We are ready to grant the zeal and
sincerity OF many people whose judgment
we question, and the confessed horrors
wrought by drunkenness have hrough,
IN my whose minds are clear enough on all
other subjects to despise the teachings Of
history AID experience when cited as
obstacles to the success Of any proposition
they advocate with a desire to curtsiling
intemperanoe.
We grant that the reverend gentleman
makes an apparently strong argument to
the effect that the practical establishment
OF local option by requiring the recon-
mendation of majority as prerequisite
to the granting of license does not differ
In principle from the present law, but if
that argument ever goes before a cour
we are confident that it will fail t.
have the force its inventors imagine
II has. Voting is very definite
thing in our system of government, aud
differs essentially from requirement fJi
a recommendation by given number OF
people. II the argument, however, were
sound it would work the opposite way
from that intended, and prove the exist
ing license law unconstitutional. We
do not understand precisely what our
correspondent means by referring TO a
decision of our State Court Of Appeals
as "antiqusted." We have never been
accustomed to consider that legal decisions
lost their force With age. Surely a
minister of the gospel who rests his
teachings on spiritual laws laid down
nearly ninteen centuries ago, and some of
which date back much further, is not
prepared to adopt the idea of some
''reformers," that laws are like eggs,
valuable in proportion to their freshness.
We desire to be entirely courteous to our
correspondent, but we cannot regard
his argument as other than one
for the evasion Of legal
decision, and his sllusion to the
antiquity" of the decision as something
which weakens its force, added to the de.
sire to evade it, makes us fear that he has
caught from his associates something OF
the very view which he rebukes us foi
sttributipg to them.
But there Is little use in arguing aboui
the details of what is known as temper
ance legislation, unless we are agreed OF
the premises. OF course, Mr.. Hunting
ton, and those acting with him, believe il
is properly within the province OF tn,
State to undertake to regulate thu
appetites Of its citizens, with q view
to making them moral by legisla
tive enactment. We account this 'pa:er
NAL government, and are opposed to it il
toto. We believe in the largest individual
liberty consistent with tue rights o
others, and in the strict enforcement 0
penalties for the violation of law. W
believe this is not merely the correc
human plan of government, but tina
according to the doctrines whion we pre-
sumo Mr.. Huntington breaches, II is ais
the Divine plan. The Creator, with fui
power to decree otherwise, EVIDENT,
chose to make man a free agent an
hold him responsible for the use he mad
of his freedom. We do not account
within the proper province OF the State t
attempt to do more We not only heliev
that this is true on principle, but We den
having such knowledge as our correspond
ent attributes to us concerning the sue
CESS of attempts to violate this principle
We think little has been gained in tn
way of stopping intemperanee i
drinking by the prohlbitory Law
of the State of Maine, while the consciou
hypocrisy of the pretence by that State I
have accomplished tho impossible, hs
weakened the respect OF its people for til
very foundations of law, and made them
race of hypocrites who worship trieker
and pretencs rather than honesty an
truth 10 all public affairs. We have L
doubt that the same tendency underli
all apparent success for the tin
being Of similar legislation elsewl!er
II Is wrong in principle, and cannot pro,
right in results. Again in most states
begins as well as ends in insinceri'y, 81
asks that men who do not at heart belize
the drinking of liquor is sin shall pr
tend, out OF difference to the opinions
others to believe SO, and base legislaiJ
on that pretence.
Holding these views, It would be ugele
for us to expect that any amount OF arg
ment would ever bring US into accord wi
the efforts starting from precisely the opp
site standpoint, and at whatever cost
the way of misconstruction or heat
abuse, EVERY EVENING shall oppose 4
plans urged by people whose motives
respects, but concerning who're wisdo
1t has the courage to say open
what majority of the men
this State think. We do, however, reoo
nize that the State has a right to reguls
and restrain the sale OF intoxicat
liquors, but we deny that such rig
carries with it the right to prohibit. 7
State has a right to regulate the mann
Of the sale OF gunpowder, because ca
lessness in this perfectly proper blu
ness might endsnger human life d
property. 1t has similar right
regulate the more dangerous sale
intoxicating liquors 1t ought to do
II can do so easily, through its exercise
police and taxing powers, and it ought
make whatever laws it does pass on tn
as on every other matter, effective.
believe in so increasing the license fee
to restrict the sgle OF liquor to o small
number of places, but not in riding o,
the knowledge of the fact that men v
buy liquor and somebody will
il to them Leave the licensed numl
sufficient to meet the known demand, |
stamp out with relentless severity the
licensed sale of liquor, and adapt the
of evidence 10 meet the known secrecy
the business, as the United States
donein It's internal revenue law. Aga
wa haliana In I'm rnaiI.n q rnnnnltr ~, q =,