The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-09-22

Svere prohibited by the Constitution it would. of
course take away the of the Legislature to reg
nlate it in any way whatever The consequence would
be that when had Legislature disposed to enforce
the Constitution would have legal prohibitions at
all other times we would have free whisky. There
would be place for except at one or the other
of these two extremes. | think this would be unfor
tunate 1t may be said, of course and it would seem
as though it ought be true that the public sent
nent that would put a prohbitory clause
in the Constitution could be depended
to its enforcement by proper legislation.
But we cannot be that this would be And
the situation of the country with the Legislature
willing enforce prohibition and unable to deal with
the liquor traffic IN any other way would he so de-
plorable that it seems to altogether unwise to take
the risk of it.
But my objection to prohibition is not confined to
that form of it proposed constitutional amend
ment it extends any legislation enacted in the usual
manner by the sanction of mere majority which
shall forbid absolutely tho manufacture and sale of
all Intoxicating drinks throughout the State. which is
what understand by the word prohibition, it IS
commonly used. In approaching this broader aspect
of the subject must consider first how and upon
whom such a law will operate. In the first place. it
will be law to prevent the use of intoxicating
beverages. have heard persons deny
this and say that prohibition will not interfere
with any mans liberty to drink but viii merely pre-
vent the manufacture and sale of intoxicating drinks
But that is hardly fair way to put it. Whisky is
1t is prevent the drinking of it that the law is pro
p, sed. And in discussing the subject we ought to
treat the law as that which it is intended to be- in fact
and operation rather than in form.
In the next place it will operate to prevent the use
of intoxicating drinks, not by drunksrds alone, but
by everyone and anyone. Now, / suppose that the
men who never get drunk but who use some ouan-
tty of intoxicating drink with or less frequency
outnumber the drunkards twenty to ana drink
three ffths, more, of all Intoxicating beverages
made and sold. Some of these men, of course. are
tanks by nature impossible to make drunk
whisky locomotive tender on water and the fact
that they do not get drunk is credit to them what
but the great body of them are men who drink
carefully who prescribe for themselves certain limits
and keep within them. / can count scores of such
me m acOuaintanc0S whom l.. Is
total abstaner justly claim sort of superiority
in any of the things chat go to make up good citi
zen. They sober industrious. honest, kind and
law-abiding. They drink beer and wine with good
conscienca as drink milk They do it because they
believe it is good for them. That l should
question the sincerity and good faith of their convc
tons would be without the least reason in the world
Between such men and drunkard there is wide
difference in respect the relations of society to the
matter however little there may be in strict moral
sponsibilty who exhibits himself drunk
commits an offense against decency. He endangers
the public peace. He puts the lives and property
of others in peril He disquafes himself for the
care and protection of his family. Against all such
by law. But the man who drinks in such moderation
that he is never in consequence Of his drinking dis
gushing in appearance, unseemly in behavior danger
in temper negectfu of his family. or wanting in
the discharge of any Of the recognized obligations of
good citizen occupies very different situation.
For what the law punish hm9 have no doubt
that general prohibitory law in Indiana would affect
ten of this class for every drunkard reached by
it. To shut eyes to this fact and consider only
the drunkardS and Saloonkeepefs. would be to take
very partial and inadequate view of the subject
Between those of who believe in and practice to-
tai abstinence and those who believe in and practice
moderate drinking there is debatable ground Many
great and learned psychologists hold that alcoholic
beverages unwhoesome In every form, and the
least quantity But many others. equally learned and
authoritative hold otherwise. So that science does
not settle the question beyond dispute. Thousands of
moderate drinkers enjoy good health andoutve other
thousands of total abstaners as well as the reverse
So that experience does not settle the question be-
yond dispute Public opinion is widely divided
the subject everywhere in the world The
whole matter is yet in the stage of conflicting evil
dence argurp emit and discussion. / have no trouble
20 decide it for myself. To my mind the arguments
in favor of total abstinence are overwhelming and
therefore adopt that practice in my life and recon-
mend il to others. But | cannot honestly say that
another may not honestly reach the opposite
cluson.
This then is what we propose to do in the enact
ment of general prohibtory law: A certain
Der of us, say thousand are firmly convinced that
all use of Intoxicating beverages is injurious and
that it for the best interests of society that it shall
be totally prohibited Certain others of fellow
citizens say nine hundred believe the contrary. and
on thiS point we cannot agree We say to them,
Alcoholic beverages hurt you" They reply I'VE
know better; they help u.s." We ply them with argu-
ments statistics facts; but in vain. At last say,
Well, ii won't listen to reason you shall submit
to law; the thousand have power to make the law
and We enact that you, the nine hundred. shall drink
more intoxicating fluids" Might they not answer
with much force You have the power to mako such
laws you will, but you propose very harsh exer
else of that power hold our views as sincerely as
you hold yours there almost many of as of
you; III it altogether fair that upon matter like this,
of private life and conduct shall be compelled to
do think best for ourselves, but you
think best for us?'
It must be remembered that am talking not of
drunkards paupers, wife heaters criminals but of
that class OF citizens whose OF intoxicating drinks
is restrained that it affects one but themselves
! am assuming, also. that the prohbitory law pro-
possd is to be an honest one and honestly enforced
so that it shall reach everybody alike and every man
from the highest the lowest. shall be inexoraby
compelled to forego the of every alcoholic bever-
age whatever / trying to illustrate just what it
is that we, the thousand total abstaners doing,
when we propose to compel the nine hundred moder
ate drinkers TO square their lives according to
views of what is best for them And submit to you
whether such course is not extreme and strained
exercise of the lawmakng power in free country. 1t
is not so much that it is interference by law with
mans private affairs for that is common enough.
mans life is his own, yet the law Furnishes an at
tempt at suicide His body is his own. yet he is pun
he is forbidden to stake it at faro table, But in all
these there is substantial unanimity of public
Judgment and conscience behind the law No right
minded citizen justifes gambling prostitution.
And ii there were the same unanimtv IN respect to
all of intoxicating drinks. the objection which
am now making TO prohibition would not exist 1t is
just because there is such unanimty Dat instead
clean division of opinion among honest citizens
upon line nicely drawn that it is difficult to-day
to say which side is the majority. that the objec
ton has force. do not say, either, that the law
should never coerce man against his private judg
ment and conscience. can imagine an honest Nor
polygamist But should not hesitate to say to
him that the majority against MIN great that
he couldn't be counted at ALL that his misnformed
conscience must be entirely ignored and that he must
give up all his wives but go to Jail without any
Nor do that the majority have not the power in
strict legal sense TO enforce prohibition 1t is the
fundamental principle of free government that the
majority are omnipotent. But the power of the
joriy is which they in duty bound to fair
ly and temperatey and with due regard not only for
the rights but for the opinions and feelings of the mi
nority And while the present wide dvis
ion OF honest opinion exists to the restrained
of intoxicating beverages while scientists disagree
while experiences contradictory; while the prac-
tees of men, and good men, the world over. are at
variance it appears to that it is not in accordance
with sound principles of government that bare
ority of the citizens of the ST. tie shall force total alb
stinence upon the bare minority by law.
We do not proceed so IN other matters of like ma
ture. Tobacco is next to WHISKY in responsiveness
useessness and mischief Opium is worse in its eff
fects than either. Even tea coffee and meat have
their enemies conscientious and jealous any
prohbitionist can be. The subject of dress is one
which concerns society closely Some nbvsiolociS