Morning journal and courier., 1881-09-13
5 szz Tuesday Morning, Sep. 13, 1881.
TEMPERANCE RECREATION.

IHMFEk&ANCE AEe1SLAT4ONs One of the most interesting and important
 discussions at the meeting of the Social Sci
 ence association was that concerning legal
 restraints on the sale of intoxicating liquors
 Judge P. Emory Aldrich of Worcestef, Mass
 advocated prohibitory laws as right in prin-
 ciple according to the highest authorities on
 the science of legislation, as sustained by the
 courts and as practically efficient and bene-
 fcial in operation. He claimed that the evil
 dence derived from three centuries of exper-
 iment in England, and at least two centuries
 of similar trial in this country, had demon
 strated the absolute insufficienoy of license
 laws, either to materially diminish or control
 the liquor traffic or to mitigate the ruinous
 evils resulting from it. Judge Aldrich was
 followed by Rev. l.. W. Bacon of Norwich,
 who contended that icense1aw was in most
 spirituous liquors
 The most striking address made was that
 of F. W. Bird of Boston, who favored the
 unrestricted sale of spirituous liquors. He does not underrate the evils of intempelance, but before discussing the remedy suggested one or two considerations, to which he thinks not enough attention has been given. The first of these is the climate influence, which seems to necessitate the use of alcoholic .stimulants ''This, at least," he said, 'tis certain, that during all the historic period, people living above certain parallels of lati- tude have indulged in the excessive use of intoxicating drinks. Any discussion which ignores this fact omits an important element of the great argument" Anoth- CT mistake, he says, is found in the belief that statute law not backed by an in- telligent and earnest public opinion can prove an effectual remedy for great public evil. Mir. Bird thinks that both prohibitory and license laws have failed, and in support of his opinion he gave sketch of the history of legislative measures intended to restrain and limit the evils of intemperance in Massa- chusetts, from the early years of the Fly mouth and Massachusetts colonies to the present time. The record he cites covers every species of restriction In early times in the Plymouth colony drunkards were put in the stocks, fined, whipped, put to hard labor, disfranchised. Men were fined for all owing others to drink inordinately in their houses. In this regime keepers of t'ordina- -ies" and other persons were licensed, but now and again forbidden to sell to certain l 'etts Bay the same course was run, and l here was frequent legislation as to the price | 'f beer and wine and other liquors. The l natter was in one way or another continually | n hand in the colonial Legislature, always l lnder the principle, or usage, of license. The ! irst prohibitory law was passed in 1852, re- | 3ealed in 1868; license was then enacted 1 hat lasted year; the prohibitory law was | e-enacted in 1869; in 1875 license was sub- ! tituted again, and MT. Bird declares it allure. No sort of legislation, he says, has | affected the consumption of intox- eating drinks
 But though in his opinion the laws hereto | ore made have not materially affected the consumption of intoxicating drinks, Mir. Bird dvocates some legislation. This, however, hould, he thinks, be directed primarily to he drinkers, who should be committed to hospitals as diseased and restrained as bur liars or robbers are restrained, as dangerous 'ersons He goes on to say that places of ale that are dangerous to the community 1 hould be treated as nuisances and abated, l nd that there should be civil damage law, olding the seller liable for all damages re- ulting from the sale. He would have the smperance question kept out of politics, the moral education of the tout of the error that alcohol is yer useful as food, as a stimulant, or for 1 1edical prescriptions, as restorative of ealth and strength ;' and says that s'the so- ial habits of the community, especially of he natural leaders of thought and public pinion, must be radically changed"
 How the temperance question can be kept ut of politics Mir. Bird does not explain. lis other suggestions have value, but de- end for their efficiency upon more en- ghtened public opinion than now exists.