New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-02-14
rrMpER1NCE MOTEMENTN.


by Mr. Blair, of Hampshire, proposing
an amendment of the Constitution In the in-
tcrest of total abstinence from all intoxicating
liquors, proposes to accomplish great d'ai
80 soon as the twentieth century shall nave ar
rived. If it passes, and gets itsell lmbcddrd
and embodied in the Constitution, Throughout
the United States no alcoholic distilled liquors.
no intoxicating liquors, can be manufactured
or Sold and none imported into the country
or exported from it, except for medicinal,
nat chanical, chemical or scientific purposes;
nor can the Illicit fluids be transported through
any part of the United States after a. ID.
1900 Now, we do not propose to argue Cor
or against the cxpcdirncy Of thus trying to
thrust into the fundamental law that which
would be more properly and hopefully under
taken by the passage Of n statute. The main
point is that there is not the least probabl that
fine Constitution of the United States will ever
be thus amended.
A minor point is that Mr. Blair hardly sup
noses that there is any such probability.
Now, ho may think that the discussion
of his proposed measure may do
good by stimulating the temperance
agitation. But suppose he should manage 10
get his amendment through Congress and sub
mitted to the people. 1t would undoubtedly
be voted down, with a majority of several
millions against it. 1t would have 10 chance
ut ALL Does Mr.. Blair suppose that such an
ignominiOus defeat could do the temperance
cause anything but grlevOus larm7 Would it
not be better for tn friends of temperance to
attempt the passage % laws satisfactory to
the people 7-Of laws which will be executed,
or which will stand some possible chance OF
being enacted We do not say that Mr..
Blair's proposed amendment is fanatical one,
but we do say that a majority of the citiz ms
of the United States will think it to be such.
If the temperance people want to be ntrustod
with legislation, to which, within proper
limits, we have not the least objection, they
ought to impress the public with an idea of
their own prudence and wisdom. Failing to
do that, they will only strengthen the hands
of their opponents. QuiXotism will do more
harm than good.
AT the same time it is but simple Justice to
admit that we see, upon the most general OBJ
servatiOn, no reason to believe that the dis
cussion OF the temperance question, as it may
be affected by legislation, Is likely soon to
cease. In Maine, the pioneer State Of special
enactments, the controversy runs as high as
ever !; nor do we see any signs Of that solid
settlement Of the matter which is much
talked Of by tho advocates of Prohibition.
Judge Goddard III carefully prepared article,
shows that there has been IN enormous null
tipicatIon Of crime and divorces in the State,
as we'll rs of cases of insanity. This has
occurred in the last thirty years, during most
OF which the ProhibitOry Law has been in
full force. Mr.. Neal BOWS remedy, we SUD-
pose, is an increase in the severity Of penal
ties for selling alcoholic drinks. He compares
the liquor traffic, III lately published article,
to "a vicious horse down in the harness,
"while several persons upon bis head and
shoulders hold him down." Knock him in
the head" says Mr.. Dow. This is an easy way
of retort, but it does not strike usas conclusive
Ii intoxicant4 are the principal cause of crime
and insanity, their sale being materially
diminished in Maine, they should themselves
have been diminished in number. Evidently
the problem has not been quite solved in thai
State yet, unless paradox be a solution.