The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1882-11-17

tB'The W. g. T. u. of Rutland have
presented petition to. the legislature
praying for the passage of the proposed
constitutional amendment relating 10
intoxicating liquors. 1t is gratifying TO
see that all the membership of that Or
ganization IN the State are not so Inn
practicable as to join in the attempt to
overthrow what is probably the best
form of an amendment we could adopt.
II is natural. of course, that faultless
angels like the temperance women oil
Vermont should wish to stop by force
every fern of wrong and cause Of
wrong i'm the state. 1t Is doubtless
natural for them to reason that since
men get DRINK nm oidor, therefore cider
should be abolished. 1t is natural that
they should wish no wine to be made
or sold in the state. Nevertheless, the
attempt to defeat the proposed amend.
ment because It does not embody these
ideas does not argue much thought as
to what is to be gained by such action.
The ladies who are opposed to the
amendment, we understand, would ia
vor It If it simply and without excep.
ton prohibited the manufacture and
sale of "intoxicating drinks" in this
state. Under such an amendment, if
cider was pronounced an intoxicating
drink, the amendment would be simply
nullity, for, amendment or no amend
ment, the fruit-growers of this state
would continue TO manufacture and
sell cider and no one would interfere.
The fact is, the sale of cider will al.
ways be difficult TO strictly regulate by
law. 1t is almost all article of necessity
In cookery and for the manufacture of
vinegar. These are legitimate uses,
and no one can rightly interfere with
them. But suppose man buys cask
of cider from farmer, to use as a bev.
erage. Is there any way in which the
seller can be compelled to learn il a
legitimate use is to be made of the CT.
der before selling it? Suppose the buy
er becomes drunk and disorderly, is ar
rested and discloses ON the farmer SELL
ing him the cider, eau the latter pro-
perly be fined as criminal seller? He
can justly argue that while he did not
inquire what the buyer wanted to do
with 1t, any more than if he had sold
MIN potatoes or pork, he supposed he
intended to make proper use of it,
lie Is not in the business of selling in.
toxicating drinks, would not sell TO a
man who esked for it to drink; but the
cider is useful and valuable product
OF his farm, and he will defy any legis.
lature in the land to take away his con.
stitutio1al right to dispose of that L.
gitimate produce as he sees fit, prov i'd
ed he does not violate the law by sell.
ing 1t by the glaoo 90 q drink. On tic
whole, we think anyone who considers
the question carefully will not fail to
come to the conclusion that the amend.
ment as 1t is before the present legisla-
ture is as it should be. 1t does not at
tempt the impracticable, and itgives the
legislature full power to regulate the
sale of cider and wine so as to prevent
their improper use. The amendment
should go. to 1.-THE people. With the
people any agitation for or against the
amendment should be made, but at the
present stage they have moral right
to expect that they will be allowed
to pass upon it themselves, rather than
have it killed by legislature exposed
to the Establishments of a combination
of impracticable temperance women
and rumsellers.