New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-04-29
THE sr1yF 1yD THE SALOONS.


We continue to-day the careful and impartial
presenta ion Of the liquor laws OF the various
States of the Union. which was begun some
weeks ago. II affords an interesting contrast
in the workings especially of High License ana
Local Option in various States widely sepa-
rated and having populations very dlherent III
character The four States presented IN THIS
showing, and in which this policy prevails are
Massachusetts, representing NeW-Engiahd'
with its high average Of intelligence, ITS com
paralively dense population and its large Tor
cign elements Minnesota, representing the
Northwest, with its marvellous growth ana
youthful energy, as well as a high level OF IN
telligence; Missouri one OF the old Border
States, prosperous and growing, but with CHAR
acteristics perceptibly different from the North
ern States in the manners and customs OF the
peoples; and Mississippi, standing for the ex-
IRENE South with its peculiar habits ana a
negro population larger than the white.
II is a fact Of great significance, the force
Of which no reasonable man can deny, that
High License adapts itself to the varying re-
ouirements of all these communities, and is
warmly commended by the great mass OF the
people everywhere. 1t is fair to infer this,
ru5licans in II hdldiag TIE laws AID praising
them, The on,y CiSsontcrS Icing tie Third
party Prohibitionsts. The number OF these
latter is so small that this constitutes an all but
unanimous verdict in favor OF High License In
these States. as in all others which have pre-
viously been under review. Minnesota has
law so severe that the lowest possible saloon
fee in cities of over 10000 inhabitants is
81 600. and nowhere less than 5000. and the
fee may be as much more anywhere as the
local authorities choose to make it but Demo
Gratis and Republicans are alike warm in praise
of the law one representative Of the former
class admitting that he did not approve OF 1t
when it was first pas L. but that its operation
has converted him. The same situation IS
seen in Massachusetts, where the licenses are
not so high, but where the system Of Local
Option seems TO have reached greater de-
velopment. Such well-known Democrats as
William f. Russell and George NJ. Stealns in
dorsc the law emphatically. In Missouri.
where the licenses are not markedly high, but
where there is local option for both cities and
counties, and where even when licenses are
granted, it must be upon the petition Of a
majority of the taxpayers Immediately affected,
| the law Is 50 COfudlN SuppOlttu bilaV " iN"uihS
| Prohibitionist, Charles p. Johnson, admits that
so far it has proved the best law for the pur-
pose of REFRESHING intemperaDcc though he
does not approve of High License and has
reference mainly to the Local Option feature.
Similar testimony. though even in stronger
FORM comes from Mississippi, where the
licenses are moderately high, and number Of
counties have adopted Prohibition under local
option There is some complaint from Rcpub-
licans, because in the prohibitory counties the
liouor-trafc GCurisheS in secret, but it seems
TO be conceded that the law is fairly good and
that the chief improvement to be desired is that
licenses might be higher. But so pronounced a
prohibitionis as John W. c. Watson says the
law has operated very greatly" to repress in
temperance and admits that prohibition should
not go in advance Of public sentiment"
We hope Governor Hill is studying our ex-
positions of Temperance laws. His organs are
suggesting that the IIigh-License bill, which
he has now before him, is political measure.
These statements show how untrue this is.
Democrats have usually opposed such laws, as
they did here, but their operation is so popular
that they now favor them and would not dare
10 off amnt TO repeal them.