Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1882-12-06
"JuggIing with Words"


is it not highly desirable that we rather dis
cuss the main intent and drift than the
possible accidents II may be that II we
press the exact words Of the Kansas and
Iowa provisions against manufacture and
sale of intoxicants for drinking purposes,
somewhat as the attorneys of the liquor
traffic would press those words and sup
pose that throughout the United States the
manufacture and sale for such purpose were
actually prevented; that there might be
such trenching upon private privileges that
at that point notifications might be found
wise such notifications as any proper
rights demanded would doubtless in that
remote contingency be made, either in the
organic law or in the enforcing statute.
But suppose that these notifications were
not made, and that the privilege of our Ger
man neighbor and of "Pat," respectively,
to their lager and whiskey in their own
houses, were destroyed for the public good,
would it be such a deprivation compared
with the good accomplished, that we,
Clement and myself, should summon our
bristling logic to prevent it : May it not
be possible that the heirs of Hans and of
"Pat" would bless us for not prevent
ing it
But even thus carried out to actual pre-
vention, it could never be properly cited as
the intent of the prohibitory movement or
of the prohibitory amendment, to stop Hans
or " Pat from drinking. what they please
| upon their own premises, so that they
| neither abuse their families nor disturb the
public peace. 1t would in that case be like
great necessary war measures, not intended
| to hurt private citizens in person or prop
erty, but which in their sweep bring incl
| dental burdens and losses to which the good
citizen gracefully submits for the public
good. Or it would find its parallel in many
needful laws to which we submit every day.
| For example, in the municipality where
| now write, il is a law that no firearms shall
| be discharged within the corporate limits
| This law was not intended to prevent you
| from shooting a fowl in your own yard, or
| from emptying the contents of your shot
gun skyward, but to furnish sufficient ground
for arrest by policeman in the case of the
pistol or rifle being heard at midnight, or
being fred by drunken man in the crowded
streets. 1t is a provision indeed made
necessary mainly by the presence of saloons
in one part of the city, and wholly unneces-
ssry within mile of the university, where
no liquor can be made or sold. But this
necessary law occasions no special embar-
rassment. 1t would not be true that the
intent of the law was to prohibit and pre-
vent shooting barnyard fowl for your din
ners on your own premises, though in terms
it does this. The law was made for trans,
gressors, intentional law breakers, and is
applied as such. The good citizen here
who shoots a fowl on his own premises
may have malevolent neighbor to enter
complaint, and for his technical breach of
the law he might be fined. But the cases
would be very rare, and the plaintiff would
Justly stand in public esteem as would the
keeper of doggery who in revenge for the
closing of his den on the Sabbath, should
have physician arrrsted for breach of the
Sabbath in his professional visits. When
this municipal prohibitory statute against
shooting was proposed, it might have been
urged that il would invade private rights
of the innocent citizen. So it would in
TERMS and so it does in words but it can
be truthfully said that this was not, and is
not, the intent of the statute that it would
be Indispensable even if it did have that
effect, in order to make dangerous shooting
unlawful and that as matter of fact, it
would rarely, if ever be, so applied as to an
noy the well-intentioned citizen.
So it can be said truthfully, that the in
tent of the prohibitory clauses proposed in
the interest of temperance, is not to invade
homes or proper personal rights or priv
ileges. Who does not know that the main
drift and intent of prohibition is against
the public temptation and bane of the re.
tail liquor traffic. When legislatures shall
come TO frame statutes to enforce this clause,
now part of those noble states of Iowa
and Kansas, and trust within the lifetime
of my brother "Clement," to be incorpor-
ated into the fundamental law of Illinois
and many other states, have no apprehen-
sion that it will be considered the intent
of the constitution to absolutely prevent
or to prohibit Hans from drinking his
lager, though that might not be the worst
still be left to moral influence. The
ending of the drinking custom will be, as
ever, moral reform, by Christly means, of
truth and persuasion, while statute law
will do just what law should do, pronounce
woe to the man that giveth his neighbor
drink that putteth the bottle to him and
maketh him drunken" The constitution
will be the basis of such statute against the
traffic, and not against drinking.
The moral influences for abstinence will
find, to be sure, a less obstrrcted field. But
so far as abstinence shall be secured, it will
be by moral suasion while the reclaimed
and the weak, the young and the unwary,
will not be met at each corner by legalized,
Haunting temptation.
Total abstinence from what causeth a
brother to offend will come by conscience,
reason, duty, and will not be " total absti-
hence by constitutional provision" unless
indeed we are Juggling with words."-
| President Hurd