News and citizen. [volume] (Morrisville, Vt. ;) 1881-current, 1883-12-27
Temperance.
CONDUCTED BY TIE LAMOILLE COUNTY
GOOD TEMPLARS' UNION.
Catechism on the Defeated Con-
stitutional Prohibitory Amend
mont.
BY y. W. WILDER.
What was this proposed amendme

What was this proposed amendment?
| The manufacture and sale of all in,
tOXicating liquors. other than wine and
cider. made from the fruits of this State
| shall be, and are forever prohibited, eX-
| cept for mechanical, medicinal and chem
| ical purposes; and cider and wine, made
as aforesaid, shall be so regulated and
| restrained as to prevent drunkenness,
pauperism and crime. 1t is hereby ell
Joined upon the general assembly to make
the foregoing provisions effective, by
requisite Legislative action
Are there any serious objections to this
form of amendment?
There are several serious and fatal OBJ
jectionS.
What is the first objection?
There is no good reason why cider and
wine should not come under the same
head as other Intoxicating liquors, so that
the manufacture and sale OF these, with
all other intOXicants, may be forever pro-
hibited, except for necessary uses.
What is the second objection?
The proposed regulation and restraint
of cider and wine fall short of a wise and
proper enactment, because it is proposed
to regulate and restrain that which does
not result, unless i'll very exceptional
cases, from the use of cider and VINE,
made as aforesaid. Drunkenness, pau
perism and crime are not direct results
of drinking wine and cider. These dread
ed results follow the use of other liquors
after the appetite has been educated to
demand something stronger by the use
of cider and wine.
What is the third objection?
Friends of the amendment claim that
the proposed regulation and restraint of
cider and wine amounts virtually to pro-
hibition. This claim is both uncertain
and invalid. Uncertain, because no one
can tell just what kind of regulation and
restraint any particular Legislature
might vote to put upon them, and in ad-
ditiOn to this, these regulations and re
straints would be subjected to restraints
and repeats. Invalid, because the com
bimed force of these two words, 'regu-
lated" and "restrained." will not admit
of such an Interpretation as prohibition,
as may be very clearly demonstrated by
the following statements, viz: An act
cannot be regulated and prohibited at
one and the same time. Again,-An act
cannot be restrained, in the sense of pro-
-hiblted, and still leave anything to be
regulated. Therefore the clear intent of
the clause is limited permission to man
utacture and sell cider and wine for nee
essary uses, and prohibiting their manu-
facture and sale for drinking purposes,
then the whole amendment falls into alb
surdty. because it makes cider and
wine an exception from other liquors
and then provides tor putting them I'M
der precisely the same kind of restraint.
That is, distinction is attempted with
out any difference.
What is the fifth objection?
The only clear Interpretation that can
be put upon the amendment will allow
the manufacture and sale of cider and
wine for drink. y clause exempting
wine was formerly part of the prohib-
tory law in the State of Maine. Under
this provision hundreds of grog shops
sprung up all over the State. Liquor
called wine, made of the Vilest COM
pounds, was sold and was such a
tremendous nuisance that the people
found it necessary to strike this clause
from their law.