Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1883-02-08
Senator Scott, Of Ohio County on
Prohibition.
Observations of Thirteen Years Travel in
All Parts of tho Union as to
the Workings of the
LIQUOR Laws.
KANSAS STOMACH lNVIGORATOR'


oath for me when came before the bar |
here and took oath to perform the duties OF
a Senator to the best of my ability and |
Judgment, and, like my friend, the Sena- 4
tor from Kanawha, feel, with the light / |
have on the subject, that my duty is to
vote against the amendment-that is, the |
submission it. have many reasons L |
could offer had the Senate the patience to |
wait and listen, but that, am sure, they |
have not, having been already wearied out |
on yesterday and to-day, and as our Wor- |
thy President has decided we cannot have |
our dinners until we are through with the
vote,
DO Not Propose
10 enter into the merits of the question.
There are one or two facts | would like to |
mention in an experience OF IL years,
travelling over this country, visiting almost
every State in this Union and Canada. l
have yet failed to find in single State
where prohibitory laws were in existence,
that they prohibited, or that the people
we're satisfied with them. You will lind
they are not what the people want, and L
want my friends upon this floor, and those
who are here to listen to this discussion, to
understand | am not an opponent OF tenn
perance. am anxious to see my fellow
men temperate, but ! say to this Senate
that prohibitIon never has and never will
prohibit. Now | refer to little village IN
Missouri, where they have university.
My attention was called TO it this morning.
The Senate will bear with me for few
minutes. They passed in 1875
A APrOhibitory Law
as far as that town was concerned against
the sale of liquor, from the fact the uni
versIly was established there, and they
were afraid the students would become
drunkards. The law was very stringent
and the penalty severe. What was the re-
suit after the law was passed in 1875? The
question is asked here what has been the
result? This is a paper OF February 5th,
right from the State where the law was en-
acted. 1t says the result has been hu-
initiating one. Whisky drinking and SELL
ing 60 on just the same, not in one or two
places, perhaps, but in dozen. And We
see it said further that $50 barrels Of whisky
and 5000 kegs of beer were received at Col
umbia depot at that time. Truly magni-
fcent showing against prohibition. They
were drank BY the people-only 1909 peo.
ple. That is one illustration. Now | ask
the gentleman
Irthe Prohibition Law
will 10 what the friends of temperance
claim for L, when we have the example of
this and many others before us, why is it
not carried out? Now, / take it no peo.
ple want law unless that law can be en-
forced. Our friend from Preston says we
have no law at present; that the law is not
worth anything. | agree with him TO
certain extent in that, because the county
courts of the State of West Virginia at pre-
ha NicIi in
some OF the counties, have the right to say
whether any liquor or saloons shall be in
the county. Marshall county has decided,
| understand, that there shall be no liquor,
yet in the town OF Benwood there are 8 or
. saloons, and ] am told they are conducted
by men of the lowest and most degraded
character. Now, if the people of Marshall
are opposed to having any liquor sold, and
We have a prOhibtory law now, which |
claim We have, why not compel these men
To Close Up their Houses.
This is my experience coming from Cam
ada down to Portland, Maine. When we
got there We stopped for breakfast. Two
very nice. genteel young men were very
anxious to have something TO take for
their stomachs' sake before breakfast They
were told they were in State where they
had prohibition laws but the young man
in charge motioned them to follow him.
They went outside the door and came in in
q few minutes with quart bottle OF whisky |
and invited their fellow travellers to have |
some, which was accepted by some and re-
fused by others. These young gentlemen
ate their breakfast and we reentered the |
car. The time we arrived at Portland, Me-,
was II o'clock. Now these young men had
had an elephant on their hands with this
whisky. The result was they kept tamper-
ing with 1t until
They Became Intoxicated.
Now argue from that one fact that these |
young men, bad they been permitted to
take drink of liquor before they ate their
breakfast, under well regulated license
law, where they would have been treated
in gentlemanly manner, they would have
gone Oh their way without carrying temp
tation with them. The prohibitory law
'orced these men to get drunk in certain
way, because they were compelled TO get
quart TO get drink of whiskey. New l
am engaged in the manufacture of glass.
When the prohibition law passed in Kan
Sas, after its passage, We got an order to
make number Of glasses with-stomaCh
invigoratOr impressed on the glass. That
glass was sent to Kansas and sold all over
the State and put in tie hands of men who
had no license to sell liquor at all, because
With Regard TO Beer.
From personal visit tC that State | will
give you an illustration Of how it worked.
The people would go into place where
they sold somebody's stomach invigorator.
There would be a case brought in the coun.
~ court or before the justices for selling
liquor or beer against the laws OF the State
of Kansas. The men who drank the beer
would BE- summoned and the men who sold
it. The buyer would be put on oath by
the prosecuting attorney. This is an actual
experience in the court room | give here.
Did you drink any beer in such and such a
mans saloon? No. Well, didn't you drink
something which resembled beer2 Yes,
sir. Did it not taste like beer? Yes, sir
Then did you not drink beer? | asked for
stomach invigorator and the man gave ME
Stomach Invigorator.
Now what was the result in that prosecu-
tiun, which is only one in hundred. The
result was and invariably has been, that
the case was dismissed from tie court at the
expense Of the State. In Nebraska, lying
right along side, they have a high tariff
license law. In city whose inhabitants
do not exceed 10000 | believe, there is a
license of 500, while in those over lO.000,
the license is SlOOO. Now the experience
of Nebraska lying right alongside of Kan
saS is, that the liquor traffic has decreased,
drinking has decreased, while the revenue
has increased. While on the other hand,
everything in Kansas shows, that drinking
has increased. In Kansas previous to pro-
hibition the collector of revenue OF the
United States issued an aggegate OF licenses,
being one to every 7S9 persons.
In the First Year OF Prohibition
the same collector issued a total showing
one drinking place 10 every 53l persons
under prohibitory laws Now, gentlemen,
in my visit 10 Kansas since the recent eiec-
tion | MADE a study OF the question there.
What better evidence do YOU want that
prohibition fails than the fact that the
year previous Governor St. Johns was
elected BY g., 900 majority, while last year
be was defeated by over 1000 with all the
great railroad monopolies at his back. TIE
railroads could not succeed in electing this
man. The change in that one State in two
years was 1900 votes. Now. geutlemaR,
ask you what better evidence DO yol want
than this, that the people Of Kansas think
prohibition is not what they want | saw In