St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-02-27
Prohibition.
To the Editor of the Globe:

| IL.
To the Editor of the Globe:
I have read with considerable interest
the articles which have recently appeared in
your columns relative to the license question.
This interest, however, was not awakened
because of a belief in the co&ectness of the
position taken by either of the writers, but
because the spirited discussion of any phase
of this great problem betokens an aroused
attention, and an aroused and intelligent
attention must precede wise conclusion.
But the conclusion, Mr.. Editor, in order to
merit the adjective which I have applied to
it, will be favorable neither to high license
nor low. l am prohibitionist
first, last, and all the time, and
trusting that you will extend the same
of license, 1 shall proceed to give you the
reason for the faith which is within me.
/ believe in prohibition because it Is right
aud license is wrong. The very fact that
the business needs a license to exist is good
evidence that it is one which is liable to be
come inimical to the welfare of the people,
| and sad experience mas proved the truthful
ness of this evidence to the people in every
hamlet i'll this commonwealth where the bust
ness has or ever has had foothold This
experience has also proved that the evil
which it is all powerful to inhict cannot be
averted by license, and the reason is not far
to seek 1t exists in the very ma
ture of the business itself, for
it is contrary to every principle
of right and justice to take from q man that
which belongs to him, except as a punish
mcnt, and give him nothing or worse than
nothing in return. The saloon contributes
absolutely nothing towards making man
kind better, or happier or stronger or
Drawer. If to-day every establishment which
exists solely for the purpose of selling liquor,
could be blotted from the face of the earth,
the sum of human happiness tomorrow
evening would be no smaller because of the
loss than twas last night. The saloonkeeper
and his business are not factors in Christian
! ity or civilization, but they are, and potent
ones, too, in degradation and crime
Wherever the baleful influence of the saloon
extends, its influence is always exerted to bru-
talize man. 1t awakens passions and begets
practices which detract from his manhood
] W u,
and that which is bad is made worse. The
business is wrong from beginning to end;
! wrong from the time it sells to the first man
! that which will steal away his brains. until it
buries the first drunkard; wrong from the
| time 10 takes from the lahorer for the first
| time the hard-earned penny which should
| have been expended for bread, until it con
signs that laborer's family to the alms-house
And being wrong il cannot be made right BY
legislative enactment. The most appreciate
effect of such law is to shift the respon-
sibility for the evil from the shoulders Of the
saloonkeeper where it properly belongs, to
the shoulders OF the people.
The government becomes a silent partner
in business which units men for law abid-
ing citizens 1t sanctions the sale of that
which is a foe to good government, and
which has been proved time and again to be
responsible for the major portion Of crimes.
II strives to build up a business which respec-
table men will not engage in. The interests
Of the government demand that the people
sh ould be sober, industrious and upright, yet
this same government: whose interests should
be precious in its own eyes, deliberately
agrees to the sale Of an article which con
stantly places them in jeopardy, and by so
doing loses the jewel Of consistency, as well
as the more precious one Of right doing.
The argument Of the anti-probibitionst
that the government hasn't the right
to say what he shall not eat or
drink is slightly nonseuscal. This is a gov
eminent for the people, and when that which
is for the good of the people seemingly be-
comes antagOnistic to the good OF the indi-
vdual, then the one must give wav to the
many. There is no right more sacred than
that Of life, and it is fifty called by the
Declaration Of Independence an inalienable
one, yet in those perilous years between 1851
and 1865, the government commanded
many Of its subjects TO yield up their lives
upon Southern battle fields
1t is one Of the foundation principles Of
this government that the rights Of the unit,
be they ever so sacred, are always subseryient
to those OF The mass. A departure
from this principle would be a
step toward anarchy. strict adherence
to It will forbid that the individual,
in order to crafty his appetite or exercise a
fancied right, shall become a pest TO the
community.
Some advocates Of license lay great stress
upon the statement that prohibition does not
prohibit. OF course the same objection could
be urged with an equal amount Of truth
against every law which aims 10 prevent and
punish crime, and consequently all laws Of
like character should stand or fail together
But the person who uses that statement as an
argument overiOoks the grand object Of pro-
hibitory legislation, which is to remove gov
ornamental responsibility for the propagation
Of this evil. Toen, II the nuisance still CON
tinues to exist, It viii not DO 50 By virtue Of
law. Then the sslOonkeeper will be legal
az well as moral outlaw God long ago
pronounced woe upon the man who giyeth
his neighbor drink. VIII he not reserve part
Of the penalty for the nation which encour-
aged the giving! PROHIBITION.
MINISTER TO SWEDEN.