Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1884-05-08

el.6o . Year, in Advance.
NUMBER 43 !.
THE QUESTION IN MAINE.
The Proposed PrOhibitOry
Amendment.
The Boston Post OF the % ult., pub
lished review of the working Of pro-
hibitory law in Maine, together with
the opinions of q large number Of prom
inent citizens of that State regarding
the pending amendment to the Con-
stitution.s We reproduce them ~ .
matter Of general interest to our read
ers, the same question being agitated
in our own State. Ex-0ov. Chamber
lain writes:
1t is fact that there is decided restraint
upon the use of Intoxicating liquors In this
state, and q strong public sentiment aginst 1t.
But It is not in the power of man to say how
much Of this is Justly to be ascribed to the
force Of otlr prohibitory law, and how much
to other influences, such as the advance of
scientific knowledge Of the hurtful effect Of
intoxicating liquors on the human system,
and economic effects Of their use upon q
community, or the advance In the tone Of
cultivated society as to what is gentlemanly
and honorable in conduct, or Of Christian
and moral sentiment, and the application Of
these sentiments and convictions In the per-
sonal efforts Of earnest men and women who
are doing such powerful work In our COM
munities. For one, / do not sypathize much
with the tendency to ay to law and only law
for the reform of morals. In ordinary con-
ditions should not expect to secure course
Of reform of morals by piling law upon law
and invoking higher forms Of It, as II names
and forms would save us. What we want
is not bigger laws, but genuineness and sim
cerity. I do not think the proposed amend
ment is needed: NOR would It either super.
sede or execute existing laws.
The Right Rev. II. A. Neely Of Port
land. Bishop ofthe Episcopal Church,
says:
Looking at the question as a mere unin-
structed layman, have been unable to find
ground for the anticipation OF great benefits
from the proposed constitutional change,
and, considering that under popular Gov
ernment the enforcement Of all laws ID chief
ly dependent upon the sentiment Of the peo
pie respecting them, should not the feeling
Of our people have been more decidedly ex-
pressed by actual obedience to the exising
laws before 1t can be wise or expedient to
engraft such provision upon the constitu-
ton?
The following is from Chief Justics
Appleton, lately Of the Supreme Court:
My opinion of the utter uselessness Of
the proposed constitutional amendment Ii
well known. may hereafter give my We've
as to the questions proposed, but it Is not ex.
pedient now.
Jndge w. Gs Bsrrpws who has jnsl
re.lre1. from the. .bs1 tlsa Qprezne
Court, wrltes 8
I have no hesitation In saying that IN my
opinion the prohibitory law Of Maine has
been and is of great service in relocating the
traffic in Intoxicating drinks, as ordinarily
carried on, to its proper place as . serious
offence against the vel. being of society, like
the coguate crimes. Jsnsnitted in tile keeping
of gambling houses.an brothels. II has
been OF service, alsbyin providing suitable
and efficient means for the detection Of an
offence the commission of which It might
otherwise be difficult to SOFT Is enti-
tied, in some sort, to bert s.sed - 1 success.
think the proposition Of the constitutional
amendment IL only one more illustration Of
this mistake on the part Of temperance men
to which have referred. LIDO not believe
that It would secure. either the permaJs1fy
or the effency of the law, or NAL one
drunkard or rumseller the less.
This is the opinion of the H6n. Jo-
siah Crosby, OF Penobscot county:
In my judgment the prohibitory policy in
Maine has been partial[ [Anccess aud to u
very great extent an ignominious failure. In
many Of the country towns aud villages
where temperance sentiment sounds upon =
high key, it seems to operate rs restraint
upon the sale of Intoxicating liquor, especial
ly upon the open public sale. In the cities
think prohibition is mainly failure. Pub
lie opinion there does not sustain 1t, and any
dominant political party by attempting its
rigid enforcement would p1ss into the mi-
nority, and has already repeatedly suffered
defeat. Any genuine temperance reformation
will, Of course, diminish the sale of intoxicat-
ing liquors. But II prohibition the cause Of q
genuine temperance reformation or Is 1t any
thing more than the product Of reforma :
tions whether prohibition Is to be success
in Maine is still, after some thirty years. ex-
perience, in my judgment, problem to be
solved. As to the proposed constitutional
I can see no good In adopting
1t, but rather evil. 4
Mr.. D. n. Ingraham cf Portland
writes: ~
have obtained this morniAk from Mr.. u
L. Rackleff Of the Internal Revenue on ssf0S
Maine the following statistics: Nun1L
liquor licenses, p9tail, issued In Maine sin6e
May 1, 1883, 1851 number liquas licenses,
wholesale, q; number mak liquor dealers,
III: total, 1885.
The population Of Maine Is 6fO, 900. Di-
vidine by 1886, we have 51s, one licenaed
liquor dealer in Maine for every SIS inhabit-
ants. f.sst
For Portland the assessors gave me the
number OF retail liquor licenses issued 80;
wholesale do, 8; total, 203.
i The population Of Portland Is about 81, 900.
There Il one license liquor dealer for every
1T inhabitants! This is 50 astounding thst
I thought had mkde : I11fake TIM 1 went
~ -. -. a !. 4 = - Z -