The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-12-25
PROHIBITORY LIQUOR LAWS
A Discussion of Their Value by the
Author of the Crusade.
Legislation Should Be Directed Against the
Grimes and Not the Vices of the Liquor
Trafic-An Interesting Discussion.

author of the woman's temperance crusade,
made an argument against prohibition. He
said
Prohibitory liquor laws are indispensable
to the triumph of the temperance cause.
But they must be applied to the crimes of
the liquor traffic, not to its vices. The fall
ure to make this distinction threatens the
ruin of the grandest revolution IN
human history. Incredible as it may
seem, our advocates of prohibition do
not even mention the crimes of the hell-born
traffic, which the law could quickly sup
press, but they grappe with its vices. In
this struggle they are sure to be defeated. L
propose 10 show in this paper what civil law
can do, and what it cannot do, in crushing
the drink traffic. l am confident more can
be done by law in twelve months than has
been done in quarter of century, and by
a simple change of tactics What the law
can do, and which would prove most effect
i've, would be supported by all classes of the
community. The present aims and methods
win the hearty support OF only very small
minority.
The most potent agency to-day in the
cause of temperance is the Woman's Nation
al Christian Temperance Union This inn
mense organization, covering our whole
country, and containing a countless army
of the best and bravest OF our
country women-this magnificent NOR
mans Crusade Will you pardon me for
saying that, as the originator of the 'Wo-
mans Crusade" l have made deeper inn
preston upon the cause of temperance than
has been made by any other single indivld-
ual upon the planet. And ask my fellow
laborers to listen patiently and candidly to
my reasons for believing that prohibition,
with its present aims and methods, is the
deadliest enemy to our divine cause
Our errors may besdivided into vices and
crimes. A vice is harm L do to myself in a
mistaken pursuit of happiness. A crime is
q harm do to another with malice prepense.
Without this malice prepense, or criminal
purpose. there can be no crime. vice is
never a crime because, in vice, there IS
never a criminal purpose. No sane person
Injuries himself with a criminal purpose. No
one becomes a glutton with criminal pur-
pose; no one becomes drunkard with a
criminal purpose In both cases the victim
seeks happiness, but he is mistaken. He
is the slave of appetite, but he commits no
crime, becaue he is not moved by Grim
inal purpose. No act however harmful,
can be a crime, unless inspired by criminal
purpose Setting theater on fire by acct
j dent is no crime though it may be followed
by the horrible death of five hundred per-
sons. Ii is no crime, because there is no
criminal purpose. The motive is the es-
% sence of 4 crime As, in the nature of
& filings, this malice prepense can never exist
IN vice so Il vice can never be a crime.
AS one does not need to demonstrate that
two and two are four, so one does not need
to argue this distinction between vice and
crime. tits the distinction of the dictionar
les, courts of law, and common sense Upon
the distinction between vice and crime
hinges the whole theme of prohibition. No
one can intglligenty consider this import
ant subject except in clear view of this dis
tinction. Those who grasp the distinction
hQt Vina Wi far n
that vice cannot be made crime by the
vote of majority, however large
But some one may say that what the law de-
clares to be crime is a crime. The fugitive
slave law declared 1t to be q crime to help
the painting fugitive No good man believed
it was a crime to conceal and feed him, and
help him on to Canada; the conductors on
the underground railroad are recorded among
our saints. The Spanish law declared Pro-
testantism to be grave crime, punishable
by the tortures of the InQuisition; but we
know that that law was lie,
B al 81 v1sA sANIPBE DISCUSSION.
10 Between the initiation of the crusade work
4 in Ohio in 1873, and my departure, utterly
! worn out, for three years camp-life on the
g Pacific lcoastin 1876, held four public dis
eussions with leading Prohibitionists. In
one of these debates, before a large audience
L asked my antagonist to give his conception
of the function OF civil law He said:
1.-THE function of the Legislature is to
watch the Commonwealth, and when danger
from any source is apprehended to provide
against it by law"
Immediately asked: do you mean from
any sourceT
CLEARLY it is the duty of the Legislature
to provide by law against harm to the people
from any and all sources"
Suppose" said, that the Legislature
should believe that the present methods of
cookery are too appetzng, and lead to ex-
cessive Indulgence, eating between meals.
and late suppers. Suppose the Legislature
believes this vice of cookery leads to enor-
nous harm, as it surely does, what would be
its dnty?''
without doubt to pass stringent laws
against such mischievous cookery"
And send an officer to every suspected
house," 1 suggested.
Surely" he replied, "a law without an
officer to enforce it is useless. An officer
should visit every suspected house, and see
that the cookery is as the law directs"
LET us suppose that the Legislature be-
heves that the corset vice is an enormous
evil, as indeed it is, what is its duty?'
Clearly" he replied, ito pass severe law
against making wearing corsets."
and" l again suggested, send an officer
to every suspected house?'
There was shout OF laughter, but my an
tagonist, with the noble courage of his con-
victions: replied:
Eyes; an officer should visit every sus-
pected house to see that the law is not vio-
lated"
"Your conception OF the function of civil
law rs that the Legislature must watch for
harm, coming from any and all sources, and
provide by law against it. When Universal
ism first made its appearance in this Com
monwealth the Legislature believed that the
greatest harm that could befall the people
was imminent; that to take hell out of re-
ligion was to open the foodgates of every
conceivable vice and crime. Now, what was
its duty?''
MY antagonist refused to answer the ques-
ton at first. l urged that my
question was pertinent, and at
length he replied with warm nassion.