Daily Republican., 1883-03-31

were two Senators from New Castle and
two from Sussex and in favor of it was
one Senator from New Castle, three
from Kent and one from Sussex. The
bill will now 60 to the House where its
fate is uncertain, but the general i'm
preston is that it will meet with defeat.
This impression however may prove as
Elusive as it did in the impression
formed of the Senate. In the HOUSE
AZ well as in the Senate the bulk Of the
vote necessary to pass the bill will have
to come from Kent and Sussex. The
people of these lower counties, whateve,
else may be said of them, are heartily
in favor of the prohibition of the liquor
tra ii, aud since the popular and
continued success of local option on the
Eastern Shore Of Maryland, the feeling
i'll favor OF the same law has increased
in Delaware. The stump orator allusion
of Senator A. Is. Cooper of New Castle,
TO the carrying OF demijohnS and jugs
in the local option counties of the l. ,st-
ern Shore, carries but little weight in
the face Of empty jailS and scarcely
anything for the Sheriff 10 do wher.
local option is observed. There is ne
doubt either OF growing sentiment in
favor OF local option in New Castle
County and right here too in the city
of Wilmington. For the growth of thi.
sentiment many of those who have
license and are engaged in the traffic
in liquor are to blame. Though they
may deny that they are constant viola.
tors of the liquor laws, and succeed in
| covering up their tracks that they can
not be detected. the fact stands out in
bold relief before the people that the
laws are violated. Intemperance is in.
creasing with fearful rapidity. There is
no rubbing that out. Our streets are
daily scenes Of youthful intoxication.
1t is nothing new to see crowds of in
toxicated boys staggering and cursing
along our thoroughfares. There is ne
rubbing thar out Hundreds of intoXi.
Gated men have no trouble whatever
in getting all the liquor they want,
els" why are they always intoxicated L:
Nearly as many Intoxicated men are
seen upon the streets on Sunday,as upon
any other day. There is no rubbin.
that ont. Where do these parties get
their liquor" Clearly, they must get il
| from licensed places. 1t is these con,
slant violations of the liquor laws thai
Is increasing the prohibitory >cntiinrn;
in the City and State, and if Local Op,
ton should become a law, these licensed
dealers who habitually violate the pres
ent liquor laws, will have tllenseI YES 10
blame for it. Had the respectable IL
censed dealers, combined toget her IT,
enforce the present liquor laws and t.
punish those who sold illegally, th"r,
would have been no such IA sweeping
sentiment in favor of Local Option as l.,
now gathering force IN the State. 1t
may be possible that the opponents II
Local Option will succeed in Strlngiing
| the present bill in the House, but ifthey
do, they will afterwards hc compelled
to uhsrrv" the present license law in tie
/ future better tAlu they have don" in til,
past or they will meet still stronger
Local option sentiment Two years
| hence.
The bill which In, passed the Srnat,
| is very stringent in its provisions. i
provides for a vote on the Fourth Tues
| day of May, separat" from any O'h"l
election instead Of applying III {;
Hundred or County, it applies /" Tie
whole State rs if it WAS a single III
trlrr. liza majority Of vote, arr, cas-,
| in favor of til" uil nn license for til,
sal" of Intoxicating liquors ar" to be
granted after January first, 1884. Fol
tn" first violation OF the law the time j,
to be not less than 800, nor more THAI
$500 with costs of provocatiom~, or i,
lieu Of the tine thirty days in jail, o.
hOtn in the discretion OF the Court. FUI
the second offence the penalty will b
not less than 500 nor more Than
5000 with costs, and in addition not les
than thirty Or more than niniy day
imprisonment Physicians are per
mitte'l to give prescriptions ONLY in cas-
of real sickness, such prescriptions ar
not to exceed one pint. If physicians
violate this section they are liable to :
fine of not less than $50 nor more thai
500 for tn" first offence, and not les
than 500 nor more than $500 for he sec
onl and each Su bsequent offence. An.
p rson getting Il prescription undo
false pretences is subject 30 the sam
fines as the physician. An objection
able feature of the bill is that half th
fines 60 TO the infrr,ner.
, Beware Of 4uarrels.
A great many persons seem dispose
tn L., u i,,hf