Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-03-30

bank, . dsmijohn concealed under the
wood-pile or the pig.sty, or In : sts-
bic, or . runlet in . secret hole 10
the wall, stop-cock to pipe leading
into the cellar, or atickler concealed on
the person Of . man or . woman--ior
oil Of these must pay tho United states
tax or be arrested by the United States
marshal and heavily fined for violating
the United States lay. The United
States tax is not . license y to per-
NIT them TO continue to sell despite
State law, but is imposed also upon
those who have been stopped from SELL
ing by the State law. -
Deducting, then, from the figures
given the State agents. druggists, &c,
and those detected and punished for
violating the law, and compare the
Beures with those Of the States where
there are no prohibitory laws, and it
will be clear that prohibition does
prohibit 10 o large extent"
AS to any open violation Of the law,
I have before me letter from Rev. DIR.
I. p. Warren, of the Christian Mirror,
endorsed by Mayor Deering and Chief
ofpolice Andrews, Of Portland, to the
effect that there is not an open saloon
in the city. and not secret one known
to the police; and letters and docu-
ments of the same general tenor
concerning the whole State of Maine,
from Rev. DIR. ii. s. Burrage, OF
the Zion's Advocate Ia gentleman
whom l know personally as one
who was q gallant Federal soldier du-
ring the war, and who has been an ar
dent friend Of the South and promoter
of peace since), and General Neal Dow,
who has been for forty years the able
champion Of prohibition. II wish you
had space to print these letters. They
are at the service of any seeker after
the truth.
But ask space for only the follow
ing brief extract from statement OF
Ex-Governor Dingley, Of Maine:
"In 1880 l3 distilleries in the State
manufactured | 900, 900 gallons ofrum;
100000 gallons were imported. Now
there is not q distillery or brewery in
the State. In 1888 there were 500
taverns, all but 40 Of these having open
bars; now there is not tavern in the
State with an open bar. In 1880 every
grocery.store sold liquor as freely as
molasses; now not one. In 1882, with
a population Of only $50, 900, there were
1900 places where intoxicating liquors
were sold. Their sales amounted to
sl0, 100000 annually, or go for each
inhabitant. Last year the aggregate
sales of 100 town agencies was $780,
600, or Is cents per inhabitant;
on the average in the remainder OF the
Union Ella per inhabitant."
have also testimony just as strong
concerning the other States, compare
tive statistics from the acknowledgements
Department showing that the consump.
ton of liquors is very much larger IN
States which have no prohibitory laws
than in States which have such laws,
and large mass of other documents,
letters, &C., which would, think, con-
vince any unprejudiced mind that pro
hibition does prohibHto large erteat,"
and even "XXX" that | made my
statement not from "hearsay testi-
mony," but from the most reliable
"facts and figures"
4. But the rashest part OF the article
of "XXX" is his claim that because
the revenue reports show that lover
$4,000 gallons Of liquor" were sold
in the four prohibition States during
last year, that therefore prohibition
does not prohibit" Let us see
If these figures include beer las |
think they do, but have not at hand
the means Of verifying, then our argu-
ment is greatly strengthened; but if
they refer only to distilled liquors
then they still prove my position be-
yond all cayil. The statistics show
that there are, in round numbers,
100,000,000 lone hundred millionl GAL
Ions Of distilled liquors sold yearly in
the United States. The four States Of
Maine, Vermont, Kansas, and Iowa
constitute one fourteenth Of the popula-
ton Of the United States, so that their
share of the consumption If "prohibi-
ton does not prohibit ~ ought to be
about 100000 Of gallons instead of
900, 200, according TO the figures Of
"XXX." Now, l respectfully submit
that law which reduces the consump-
ton from 10000 Of gallons down to
222, 900 gallons "does prohibit to a
very large extent" and that "XXN"
is very eilectually "kOisted with his
own petard."
There are other points which | should
be glad to notice, but must not tres
pass further on your space, except to
ask once more why the liquor-men aud
their friends are SO violently opposed to
our carrying local option " if it will
prove failure and will increase rather
than diminish drinking, and how can i,
possibly injure business, as they claim
if prohibition does not prohibit y?
j. WILLIAM JONES.
Richmond, March 90, 1886.