St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1882-10-27
The Constitutional Amend
ment.

The manufacture and sale of intoxi-
eating liquors, other than cider and
wine. made from the fruits of this state,
shall be and are hereby forever pro-
hibited, except for mechanical, chemi-
cal and medicinal purposes; and cider
and wine made as afOre said, shall be
so regulated and restrained as to pre-
fent drunkenness, pauperism and
crime.
/ The amendment, as appears from
the statement of Hon. David f. Mich
olson of Rutland, was drafted by him
self, fact which is no particular cred
it to him, as it is one of the most bung-
ling pieces of phraseolOgy ever pre-
scented to a legislative body. The
legislative correspondent of the Bur
lington Free Press thus analyses it:
To have some idea of the litigation
which is likely to ensue, in case the
amendment is adopted, it is only nee
essary to observe the punctuation of
the first clause. There is il comma af-
/ ter "liquors,n another after "wine,"
and third comma after estate" The
strict grammatical construction of the
clause therefore is, that the manufact-
ure and sale of intoxicating liquors
made from the fruits Of the state, shall
be and are hereby forever prohibited,
etc. Thus allowing the manufacture
and sale of intoxicating liquors not
made from the fruits of this state, and
prohibiting the manufacture and sale
of cider and wine, the very things,
tt-hi .h 10 ha Of
state, Mr.. Nicholson meant to allow to
be sold. | have copied the punctua-
ton as it is given in the printed slips
of the proposed amendments, furnished
to the members. If that is the punctu-
alton of the original las | suppose it to
be), the legislature may well hesitate
before adopting it. 1t practically
makes ''free rum" a part of the organic
law of the state. In order to carry ont
the undOubted intention OF Mr.. Mich
olson, there should be no comma after
wine" The legislature has no power
to alter in the slightest degree any of
these proposed amendments. 1t must
adopt, or reject them, just as they were
transmitted by the last legislature. If
adopted by majority of the present
senate and majority of the present
house, then the freemen have the power
of accepting or rejecting them at IA flu
ture time to be designated by the legis-
lature.
At the hearing the amendment was
defended by Mr.. Nicholson, its author,
and opposed by Mrs. Green, president
of the state union. The same CORES
pendent says:
The main point which Mrs. Greene
made against the adoption was that it
permitted the manufacture and sale of
cider and wine made from the fruits of
the state, subject to the regulation and
restraint of the legislature. In the
first place she did not believe in allow
ing the wine to he made at all, and did
not think that cider ought to he sold,
although she unwillingly consented to
| its manufacture, sin tenderness to the
| frailty of masculine natures" who
would not, as yet, give it up. She ar
gued, too, that the words ''shall be so
regulated and restrained by the legis-
| lature," meant license, and that if wine
and cider shops could be licensed under
the protection of the constitutional
amendment, then Vermont would have
taken step backwards.
The Amendment Herald, published
| by the ladies' state union, thus states
their objections to the amendment:
1t is no stronger, if as good, as the
prohibitory law. Its purport is to try
and cover Section $500 in Chapter 1863 /;
but we claim greater liberties are Civ
en- To cider and wine than is provided
| by the law. We further claim the
amendment to be a ''lieense law" for
cider and wine. We object to license
of any Intoxicating beverages in the
constitution. We do not desire the
wording of the constitution to be such
us shall do away with the manufacture
of cider for the purpose of vinegar. If
| the words wine and cider are left out,
they will then simply fall under the
law, when intoxicating, where it can
| be taken care of, by the LdW. Our OBJ
ject in the circulating of the "amend
ment petition" is to defeat the present
amendment ; and if impossible to amend
the amendment. to defer constitutional
amendment another ten years, rather
| than see the present one become IA part
of the constitution since the cOnstitu-
/ ton must remain ten years, while
statutory law can be amended from
time to time, as the sentiment advan-
/ ceS.
The Free Press editorially says:
/ The ladies' logic is not altogether
clear. 1t certainly is impossible to
amend the pending amendment. Hav-
ing been proposed by the senate and
accepted by the house, it has passed
beyond all power of change, and must
stand or fall as it is. If it becomes
part of the constitution, it will license
nothing. The Legislature will have as
much power to change the statute in
the direction of stTingency us it had
before. The law, in our humble opin-
ion, is practically stronger with its per-
mission to make and sell cider, (most
of which becomes vinegar) and wine
from native grapes, and with legal safe
guards against the promotion of drunk
enness, pauperism and crime thereby,
than it would be without. But if the
legislature chooses to amend it hereaf-
ter, so as to prohibit the manufacture
and sale of native cider and wine, it
can do so. under the amended cOnstitu-
ton as easily as now. The ladies may
be able to defeat the pending amend
ment, as they avow their purpose to
do. But we do not believe they will
promote the cause of temperance
thereby, nor make it any easier to Sc
cure the amendments which they pre-
fer, eleven years hence, which is as
soon as another constitutional amend
ment can be submitted to the public.
The Montpelier Journal gives a copy
of the original amendment as it passed
the legislature at the session of 1880,
from which it appears that the comma