The Evening critic., 1884-02-06
Prohibition in gIaine-Are the Com
missiOncre Mistaken?
WASHINGTON, d. O, Fet

WASHINGToN, ID. v, feo. a, 1854.
TO he Editor of The EUenino Critic:
Monday issue OF your paper tells us that
our Commissioners are collating great deal
OF evidence on the temperance question and
among other results OF their labors you give
some figures furnished for the purpose OF
showing that prohibitory laws In Maine are
less effective in preventing drunkenness than
moro liberal laws in the District OF Columbia.
Maine law failure. We hope our rulers do
not attempt TO secure better legislation for tho
District In every other direction from as er-
roneous basis as the one from which they
treat the liquor question.
In the first place the statistics given are not
correct either as TO Maine or the District.
In the second place tho results In Maine are
not what we are expected TO infer from their
conclusions.
Hon. james G. Blaine, who may be supposed
to know fully as much about his State as tho
Commissioners, says in public letter to the
voters of Maine, In August, 1882; 'Intemper-
ance has steadily decreased In tho State since
until now II can be said with truth that there
Is no eqnal number OF people In the Anglo
Saxon world among whom so small an amount
OF liquor is consumed as among tho 650,0O0
The Republican State Conventions for tho
past four years have declared for prohibition,
stating that '"the wisdom and efficiency OF
which Legislation In promoting the moral and
material Interests OF Maine have been demon.
strated through the practical annlhilation Of
the rae In large por,Sn ana Q, bas tns Saa
hibitory law upon her statute books, and there
is not political party. in the State which
dnres take sides against II.
Senator W. p. Frye said some time since, In
apublic letter, 81 can and do from my perso'
nal observation unhesitatingly affirm that the
consumption of intoxicating liquors In Maine
is not One-fourth as great as IL was twenty
years ago; that In tho country portions OF the
State the sale and use have almost entirely
ceased. Our remarkable temperance reform
Is the legitimate child OF the law"
In another letter Senator Frye speaks OF
| HIS long experience as a prosecuting onlcer,
has anght nm tse he 81
man in Maine who is not predjudiced by
reason OF being seller, drinker TO excess,
Sa T not aSo SSnSee WIN
calculablei nor respectable woman who
| does not pray for Its continuance. Thus
briefly have given my testimony and know
Governor Dingley, Senator Lot NJ. Morrill,
| Hon. Hannibal HaInlln, Hon. Eugene Hale
and other prominent mon OF Maine concurred
Every dlstlllery and brewery In tho State
| has been closed.
| Hon. Nelson Dingley says; "The fact thai
| the U. s. revenue report shows that only toul
cents per inhabitant was collected on the
| manufacture and sale OF liquors In Maine IL
| 1882, while 81 40 per lnhabitant was collected
In the whole Union, affords striking con
/ trast,"
| Tho Internal revenue books show S13 per
sons have poll the United States tax OF S25
| this does not prove, however, that any OF then
have been allowed to sell by the State law
Nearly all are In large cities, and, with thu
exception OF Bangor and few other places
| are obliged to sell In secret and in very small
quantities. There are 413 secret or suspected
places where liquor can bo gotten, which, witt
the 170 open places In Bangor and the othe
large cities, make 622 In all, or one to ever.
| 1000 Inhabitants, while New York and NeY
| Jersey have a dram shop to every $50 people
and tho average throughout the Union Is on'
for every 500 OF the population.
There are 1913 towns in Maine where ll1uO
cannot be bought. II tho Commissioners wan
| 10 know about Maine lot them get tho testl
| mony OF Maine mon. AJAX.