The Portland daily press., 1884-08-05

| To the Editor Of the Press;
In compliance with the request of the editor Of
the Boston Post, desiring my views as to the pro
posed constitutional prohibitory amendment,
yentured to express opinion adverse to its
adoption. Whereupon the editor of the Christian
Mirror adopting as his text quotation from the
Eastern Argus, was pleased to say that sit is a
thousand pities that men of standing and command
ing influence in the community should many of
them, be so utterly obtuse to the great moral move
ments which from time to time arise" Assuming
that the editor would not Intentionally misrepre.
sent me. can only account forhis subsequent com
ments upon the theory that he had never taken the
trouble to read what had said. And now General
Dow comes into the field, prancng on his hobby
horse and with his proVerbial inaecuracy, charges
me with being not only against his constitutional
amendment but as against the general policy of
the suppression of the liquor traffic. He unex-
pectedly aceords to the rig1 to entertain and
express an opinion upon this subject in the same
manner as Bob Ingersoll has tie right to proclaim
the doctrines of the in6del, but denies that the
opinion of any man who does not believe in the
necessity or wisdom of the prohibitory amendment
is entitled to the least consideration or weight.
Now while 1 am quite willing to admit that nv
individual opinion upon this question is not of
much consequence to the public do not feel in
clined to submit to the mputaton of having an ut
terly obtuse moral to be classed with Bob
Ingerso without presenting to your readers exactly
what did say. L therefore hand you copy of
what appeared in the Boston Post with the request
that you will make it part of this communication
TO the Editor of the Boston Post:
That great ogress has been made in this state in
the suppression of the vice of intemperance since
the year 1861 when the $50 called prohibitory law
was passed, and especially in the country towns,
L am of fho v,.1,,t
this change has been produced in the interior towns
princi. ally by the use of moral means. The tenn
perance societies, of which there is one or more in
every town, the discussions at the mass meetings
the appeals of the press and the pulpit the Danish
ment of social drinking, individual example and
effort, and the disinterested efforts and winning
influences of woman, have in the main accomplish
ed this great good. The prohibitory law has never
IefoTmed an inebrate, and its only effect upon such
has been to throw obstacles in the way of his
procuring the means TO crafty his appetite. The
temperance sentiment Is so firmly established in
the country towns that, under a local option law
nine-tenths of them would against license IL
is only by the formation of an overwhelming public
opinion in its favor that the temperance reform can
hope for complete success.
In the cities prohibition is confessedly failure
as 1t will be everywhere unless sustained by
vigorous public sentiment, which will to it that
the present stringent law is impartially enforced
The proposed constitutional amendment is not en-
titled to favorable consideration as a measure in
the interest Of temperance because it is political
movement, under the auspices of the Republican
party, to carry into effect corrupt political bar
gain DOtWcCu pAOAlUllOIy temperance men and
tain Republican leaders whereby the prohibitorv
votes of the former sold to the latter in 1850
Re S fRs 5e1b Gf f fs
can legislature elected in that year. voted the sub
mission, and, stated at the time in debate on
the floor OF the house of representatives to carry
out conceded bargain. 1t is a useless measure
because it tends to produce valuable result. Ii
is unnecessary because under the existing eonstitu
tion the leg.l ature has the same power over this
subject as it would have after the adoption Of the
proposed amendment. The present prohibitorv
law is constitutional would be any future law
passed by the legislature not in conflict with the
general provisions OF the constitution. 1t is wise
rule OF political action never to do an unnecessary
act. 1T is miSchievous and revolutionary in its
tendency, because it establishes a precedent for
useless and unnecessary changes of the organic law
upon which rests the fabric of the government II
mars the harmony and symmetry of the constitu-
tion because it introduces into it the subject OF
mere police regulations, when the true and legiti-
mate design OF such an instrument is to declare in
general terms the underlying principles of civil gov
eminent; to limit the power of the constituted
Legislative judicial and executive authorities OF the
state to the grants made by the constitution and
to protect the people from any infringement of the
natural, Inherent and inalienable rights which
they have reserved to themselves.
The temperance cauee gains neither new legal
sanction nor fresh moral impetus by the adoption OF
the proposed amendment, and is of too sacred
character to be made the football of politicians
The attempt to trammel the action of future legisa
lures by the constitutional amendment eyinces
distrus5 of the permanency and progress of the
temperance sentiment in this state. Ii is to be
hoped that the sentiment will strengthen as the
years roll on, that it will be safe for the next 30
years, as it has been in the past 3d. to entrust to
the legislative branch of the government the power
to pass such laws upon this subject prohibitory or
otherwise public opinion and the exist ing state
OF society may require. If the amendment should
be adopted and the legislature should repeal the
present law, the state would have an amen ded con-
stitution without any law to render it etfectual
BIoN BRADBURY.