Turner County herald. (Hurley, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-19??, 1883-08-23

that the " amendment carried and the
state supreme court declared it consti-
tutional. Gov. st. John says: This
government cannot exist half drunk
and half sober" True, but let us place
the blame where 1t belongs, equally on
the consumer and seller, both promo
ters of crime. Does it seem logical
assumption that because the consumers
abuse liquors therefore the manufact-
urers and sellers are criminals? If SO,
then are the manufacturers of strych-
mia, arsenic and other poipns, criminals
because men sometimes employ these to
commit suicide. Prohibition assumes
that the manufacture and sale of liquors
are wrong, in themselves, or perhaps,
because men of depraved appetites
abuse them; then the manufacture of
hundreds of medicines and the prepara-
tion of thousands of drugs is wrong,
and likewise the sale of them.
Manufacturers and statesmen should
be made to pay for the protection the
state requires by consequence OF their
selling drugged and poisoned liquors.
If it finds that the drugged liquor busi-
ness promotes largely crimes of differ
ent kinds, let these dealers pay for the
results, pay the costs of the punishment
or suppression of such crimes; but re-
member that the drinker is parttceps
c,'ianinis too, and make him responsible
in every reasonable way.
"Injury to the liquor dealer" "Pity
for the helpless inebriate! Home pro-
tectiony" are the watchwords of the
suppressionists. There is large meas
ure of truth in them; but at the same
let us look at the other side and place
some of the responsibility where it be-
longs, on the drinker, who abuses, and
the adulterated articles.
Again they say: "There is no reason
able ground for complaint against a
law that forbids my doing harm to my
neighbor's life, health, reputation, fami-
ly or property" No, not if my neigh
Dor can't help himself; but if my
neighbor is a free man, thoroughly
cultured man, and says he will have
none of my "rectified" stuffs then he
places it beyond my power to harm him
in any way, though may own all the
liquor establishments in the land. You
see that there is difference between
the sale and manufacture of liquor, and
the crimes known to the law, just the
same as there is a difference between
the manufacture and sale of strychnia,
and suicide. In the case of the sale of
liquor, have the means within myself
my own resolute will and freedom
against any harm the seller can do me
in any way. But the case is different
in crimes, for then the chief means to
protect me from injury is the state and
the strong arm of the law; for a man
may murder me unawares, may steal
from me without my knowing it and
thereby injure me; may slander and
malign, but he can never make me
drunk with my knowledge or injure me
by all the liquor in the world, unless l
consent.
The writer can, and does sympathize
with that truly christian spirit which
says, eff eating meat maketh any
brother to offend, will eat meat no
more SO long as the world stands" or
equivalent terms; he also thinks that
person is truly to be pitied whose men,
tai vision is insufficient to enable him
to see the difference between two ex-
tremes-the absolute prohibition of any
kind of liquors, however pure, for any
purpose, and the unrestrained freedom
to sell any decoctions dubbed bitters
and drinks, for beverages. That mind
must be lacking in some element, which
cannot discriminate between those who
refuse, those who use, and those who
abuse liquors, but would class the latter
two under one head. can understand
why men, alarmed by the progress of
drunkenness, combine to patronize ten-
peronce; but l cannot see why men,
holding high public trusts, exhibit such
stolid indifference to causes and effects
Of laws, the underlying principles and
moral aspects of this question. I can
sympathize with law that has good
only for its end; but a law founded in
ignorance and executed by prejudice,
becomes atyranny. Toillustrate: Sup
pose you could get majority to favor
a law against the use of coffee, would
that prove the majority were morally
right and the use of coffee a vicep
Would not the logical inference be, that
truth, in that case, abides with the mi
nority, and that the law was tyranni-
cal? Let us see that our cases are al
ways parallel, and laying aside all
prejudices, let every question pass on
its own merits, thereby establishing
truth, and promoting human progress.
Recapitulate-Let us see what it is we
wish to prohibit; see where the full re-
sponsibility rests; see what is the best
means of educating people up to the
point of temperance-law or right
teaching in the pulpit, in the school
room, in the press, everywhere. Let us
learn the lessons of the past, and "look
before we leap" for we are otherwise
very liableto "leap from the frying-pau
into the fire." have written this with
statistics taken from prohibition
sources, and with an earnest desire that
the right kind of prohibition shall tri-
umph.