The Portland daily press., 1883-02-05
THE PRoHIBIToRY AMEND MRNT.
A Lively Discussion in the Rouse of Rep
resentatiYes.

/
lFrom the Kennebec Journals Report of Fridays
| Proceedngs
| The House resumed consideration of the re-
solve proposing prohibitory amendment to
the Constitution, under debate when it ad-
| journed yesterday.
Mr.. Talbot, of East Machias, said the Con-
| stitution provides that the Legislature NAV
| propose amendments to it when two-thirds of
both branches shall deem it necessary. and. in
his remarks he would copfine himself to this
! single issue of the necessity. 1t was incum-
bent upon those asking for the amendment to
convince two thirds of the House, at least
that it was necessary. The argument brought
forward to show this necessity was the terrible
evils from the use of intoxicating drinks. Was
| this amendment necessary for that reason?
Would any gentleman propose an amendment
| to the Constitution On the question of murder
burglary, or any other OF the crimes known 10
| our law? They would not, because unneces-
| sary. He had heard no arguments here that
showed necessity for the proposed amend
| ment. He did not deem it necessary, beeause
IT had been established by the highest court of
the United States and of this State, unapi-
mously, that the regulation and control of the
question of intoxicating drinks is police reg
ulation, and that the Legislature las sovereign
| power ONoE IL, anu tudy lUnlCL p60alJl66 to
degree; and this without anything in regard
to it in the Constitution. The Legislature al
ready possessed this power; and was it afraid
to assume it? There already existed law, If
they dared to enforce it, that would stop the
evil comp lained of in less than three months
But there were those in favor of having the
law engrafted upon the Constitution because
they we're not in favor of its enforcement He
did not include in this remark its honest adyo-
Gates.
Mr. Thatcher If Ranro. 5os;ro5 =. -.
briefly his reason for voting for the resolve,
The Republican party had made this question
one of the planks in its platform at Portland
1t had agreed to submit this question to the
people, and 1t was done as an inducement to
the temperance people of the State to sustain
that party at the polls in the coming election.
AT that election the people had chosen a large
majority of Republicans, two-thirds of the
House. Had it not been for that platform
many now present would not have been elect.
ed. Tt was now in the power of the Republicans
to carry out this promise which the party had
given to the people, and be felt that he would
be recreant to his duty If he failed to vote for
the resolve. 1t was not necessary that any
member should commit himself in favor of the
amendment. He had very strong doubts as to
its expediency, and he reserved the right to
vote upon 1t as he pleased at the polls But he
believed the Republican party was bound to
carry out the terms of its platform and submit
this question to the people.
Mr. Ives OF CaStlne supported the resolution
He had no judgment to reserve, but declared
himself fully in favor of the proposed amend
ment Some did not sympathize with the en-
forcement of the liquor law because they liked
liquor; others did not on account of political
reasons. This influenced him in his vote, His
idea was that it would take the question out of
politics in great measure, SO that men, when
questions OF temperance legislation came up
would cease to be agitated and to scan them
with view to see their political bearing upon
their party. He eontroverted the statement
that there is as much liquor consumed in the
State today as thirty years ago.
Mr.. Piper, of Keuduskeag, was sorry that
the question of political parties had been raised
in the discussion. He was thankful that he
came here without any pledges to hamper him.
1t was not question of expediency of party
but whether there was necessity for it. The
Constitution, according to his views should not
be tampeIed with, aid he did not believe in
loading it down with criminal law. No neces.
sity existed for it. No one had proposed or
asked for repeal of the present law. He
hoped every member would vote his indepen-
dent conviction regardless of party whip and
party plai forms.
Mr.. Talbot replied to the gentleman from
Bangor mr. Thatcher).
Mr.. Rogers. of Bath, said that yesterday he
had offered an amendment which he thought
would be clearly understood by the people
when the resolution went before them, and if
1t had been adopted he would have voted for
the resolve. But he should now vote against
1t. he criticised the measure and said that
week ago yesterday Mr.. Dow had admitted to
him that the true Interpretation of it was that
all all apothecaries could be licensed to sell all
kinds OF Intoxicating liquors. He contended
that the resolve was contradictory in its phrase
ology and denounced iG as fraud upon the
people.
Mr.. Elbrdge of Dexter said the party to
which he belonged stood committed by prom
ise to submit this question to the people and the
obligation was upon Republican representa-
| tives to make good that promise today
Mr.. Hall of Rockland said at the last session
| OF the Legislature he had voted against the
| proposed submission to the people. It had
| come without the voice of the people behind
| 1t. He had no argument to make now as to
the propriety of its incorporation into the con-
| stitution but he did recognize the voice of the
| people in the matter. He also recognized the
| force OF the argument of the gentleman from
| Bangor (Mr. Thatcher.) Iu the Republican
| party he recognized the party that had fastened
| upon its legislation the principle of prohibit
| ton The party by its platform had asked
| that this question be submitted to vote of
| the people, and he thought he had no right
now to deny that voice.
| Mr.. Thompson of Brunswick said that while
| we are all, in large sense of the word, demo-
Gratis, believers in the capabilitY Of men to gov
ern themselves, he did not feel obliged to ad-
| init that the first Impressions of men are always
| Just. Public opinion is a wavering thing and
tends to extravaganza, although it comes to
rest upon firm foundation of justice in the
| end The trainers of our constitution under
| stood this, and they did not intend to make the
| constit ution SO that it could be changed with
| every changing wind. Members had sworn to
| support that constitution. They had taxed up
| on themselves higher responsibility than po-
| litical platforms could impose. The constitu-
tion asks members whether the resolution
ought to be part of it, and they ought to an
| SWer like men. The QuesLiOn ~ not " hat her