Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1883-07-14
THE FOLLY OF FAOTI0US 0PPOSI-
TON.

1lVNs
The new dram shop law section 54S6,
is in these words, "Any person having
a license as a dramshop keeper, who
shall keep open such dramsh0p, or shall
sell, give away or otherwise dispose OF
or suffer the same to be done upon OF
about his premises, any intoxicating
liquors, in any quantity ,on the first day
of the week, commonly called Sunday
or upon the day Of any general election
in this state, shall, upon conviction
thereof, be punished by a fine Of not
less than fifty nor more than two hun
dred dollars, shall forfeit such license,
and shall not again be allowed to obtain
a license to keep q dramshop for the
term OF two years next thereafter"
This law is plain. There can be no
misunderstanding it. The state su-
preme court has decided that it is con-
stitutional. And yet the s .Louis news
papers inform us that there Is q deter
mination on the part of largo classes Of
the people there to either disregard this
law or to 30 enforce it rs to make it OBJ
noxious and impossible Of continuance.
We are NOT at all a Sabbatarian as that
term is generally understood. We do
not believe that we have any right to
impose our particular habits upon other
people. But in this case the state, As it
has often done before, in granting q
privilege imposes q condition. In per-
hitting q certain person to sell intoxi-
cants six days in each week 1t with
holds permission to sell them on the
other day of the week, commonly called
Sunday. The individual has full liber-
ty on that day to eat or drink whatever
he may choose, but for that day, by ac-
ton of the state, supposedly for the
good of the people in general, no intox-
icating liquors are to be sold. as4'
The state law especially provides for
the sale of beer, cider and native wines
under a separate and different license
than the one required where whisky,
brandy and other alcoholic liquors are
sold, but section 15s1,R s., an old law,
covers this class of vendors, in this Ian
guage, "Every person who shall ex-
pose to sale any goods, wares or mer-
chandise, or shall keep open any ale
o. porter house, grocery or tippling
shopper shall sell or retail any fermented
or distilled liquor on the first day Of the
week commonly called Sunday, shall,
on conviction, be adjudged guilty of a
misdemeanor, and fined not exceeding
fifty dollars Beer gardens or beer
houses whose sales are verylarge might
afford to pay a fine of fifty dollars per
week, for the privilege of selling on
Sunday but the law, in another section,
provides for a fine of fifty dollars for
each servant or apprentice an employer
permits to work on Sunday. These
liquors cannot be sold without the aid
of servants; consequently where there.
is a disposition to enforce the law the
means exist to do so. The law of 1857
we do not here consider, first, because
we think it is repealed by subsequent
Legislation, and second, because if 1t is
not held to be repealed 1t may furnisha
legal meal of adjusting the Sunday
question in the city Of st. Louis, that
will not involve revolutionary proceed
ings, which cannot meet the approba-
ton of law abiding citizens. ''"'
We have briefly rehearsed these facts
in order to make upon them a few OBJ
servations.
In the plan to render this Sunday law
obnoxious, it is said that it is contem-
plated to force the closing upon Sunday
Of all street railways, livery stables,
hotels, and barber shops, al they are
supposed to violate the letter of the
law. Those intent upon this course
can see that the letter Of the law per-
mits "household Offices of daily necess-
ity or other works of necessity" All
the Sunday laws of the Revised Stat
utes, from section 1878 to section 1852,
inclusive, have been for years upon the
statute books, were taken from Wag-
ner's statutes, as contained in the pre-
vious revision, and have been time and
again passed upon by the courts and
always sustained. The occupations
above threatened, it is safe to say, and
any person not under the influence of
passion or prejudice must see it, will
by, the courts be held to be "works of
necessity'-for necessary locomotion,
for necessary sustenance, for necessary
cleanliness. The courts will just as
surely hold that liquor selling is not a
necessary work" for Sundays. We
have no prejudice against beer and
wine-on tho contrary, we consider
them to be among the agencies of tenn
perance in America; we have no idea
that rational amusement on Sunday is
sinful-on the contrary, we believe
that it is healthful and conducive. to
happiness and length of days. We have
not space here to enter into the discus.
sion of the different schools of thought
upon this question. The extremes are
very far apart. 1t seems to US that the
law covers medium ground.
1t is claimed by some persons, prin.
cipally by demagogues, that the habit'
of foreigners cannot in this country
safely be interfered with, o ought no
to be depressed and controlled. II
this the sufficient answer is made tina
this is America, that American custom
are not altogether to be set aside be
cause of the injection of new element
into the body polite, and that anon
the dearest of all American institution
is the American Sabbath-the decent
orderly observance of Sunday inter