Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1886-12-13

REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMIT
TEE ON THE LICENSE BILLS.

readers:
The special committee to which
was referred house bills Nos. SIG and
339, entitled San act to regulate the
sale of intoxicating liquors" respect
fully submit the following report:
We find that in large proportion of
the towns of this state the s ale of in
toxicants is entirely suppressed by
the prohibitory law, that in most 9TH
ers the sale is restricted and outlaw
ed-driven to secret and obscure |
places and made no longer respect
able traffic-while IN only compar-
atively few is the sale at all open,
unconcealed and notorious, and in |
none is that sale as open and notorl-
Gus, or its surroundings IS public
and attractive, or the influence grow
ing out of the same as harmful, as
under license law. We are salts
fed from the proof before US that the
claims made by the friends of IL
cense, that as affecting the features
which restrain or limit the sales, or
prevent the existence of low, unli-
censed saloons, license law is in
any sense self-enforcing law, are
not supported by the facts coming
from the states now using 1t nor
from the history of our state, which
for many years before adopting the
prohibltory law tried every kind of
license with barren results. From
the proofs which are before US we
are convinced that in states where
the license law prevails the enforce
ment of It's restrictive features are
more difficult than the enforcement
of a prohibitory law, and that such
would be the case in our own state;
and that as matter of fact the re-
strictive features of the license law
in states where that policy prevails
are less carefully observed and en-
forced and the attractions of the
same are much less frequently pub
lished than are the prohlbitory feat
ures of our present law in this state !;
and that such would be the record
here were we to adopt license we are
fully satisfied. 1t is not true, as
claimed by the friends of license,
that money is lavishly expended in
the enforcement of the prohibitory
law. On the contrary, the fact
clearly appeared that the fees attend
ing the prosecution of this law are
less than in other cases of equal
magnitude and are indeed so small
as to make Its enforcement charge
upon the public spirit and generosity
of officers and attorneys who are call.
ed upon to perform this duty. 1t is
not true, as claimed by the friends
of license, that the enforcement oil
the prohibitory law is heavy bur-
den upon the state; on the contrary
it appeared by the testimony of oul
state auditor before US that, unlike
other criminal statutes, this law il
self-supporting, the revenue there
from in fines, costs and forfeited
bonds fully equaling if not exceed
ing the expenditures. We are salts
fed, from facts testified to before us
that in the other prohibition states
as we'll as our own, most if not al
acknowledge marked and considera
BILE improvement in lessened sale
and greater sobriety under prohibit
ton. Notably is this true of Kan
sas, where by responsible authorit
it has been stated that the sales hav
been lessened nineteen-twentieth
and the manufacture entirely stayed
1t is not true, as claimed by tn
friends of license, that many state
have recently returned from prohib
ton to license. Nebraska is the La
which changed to license in 1885,
With this single exception no prohil
itory statute has been repealed SIM
1873. But the converse is true tn
the recent changes have all been fro
license to prohibition, viz: Kans'
and South Carolina in 1881, Iowa
1884 and Rhode Island in 1873
while Maine in 1884, after thir
years of experience, wrote prohit
tion into its organic law by majC
lty of over $4,000. Kansas, 10,
and Rhode Island have all recent
voted in favor of. constitutional pl
hibition. Dakota also seeks adm
sion into the slsterhood of stat
with a constitution adopted by
people prohibiting the sale of into
icating liquors. Hence we are TO
ed to the belief that the univer
trend of legislative enactmt
throughout the United States is I
from prohibition to license,
clearly and emphatically from licel
To- prohibition. We believe that
third party movement in favor
prohibition is not an index that
people are desiring a change back
license, but, on the contrary, 1t vC
es large and growing sentiment
favor of national prohibition wi
urging better results under that
in states where it already exists ;
that the safe and wise course for
state is to respect that sentiment
enact all practical measures to
prove the execution of the prohl
DRY law. No evidence, as clail
by the friends of license, has app
ed before us showing that in