St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1888-11-08
is 1T TO BE LICENSE?

Representative Pitkin of Montpelier
has introduced in the house bill No.
216, Gan act authorizing licenses for
the sale ofintoxieating liquors in towns
voting to grant Them" The bill is
supplementary to the existing prohib-
itory law, sort of local option amend
ment. 1t is falsely called a high Ii
cense measure. The fee for license
is put at the not very "high" price of
5000.
There is nothing particularly re-
markable about the introduction of a
license bill in the Vermont Legislature.
fore. There is something worthy of
serious consideration on the part of
the friends of prohibition, however, in
the reception accorded this bill.
The Montpelier Waterman, the lat
est ally of the friends of license, heart
lily champions the measure. In its
on "Republican High License" paves
the way for the open and unqualified
advocacy of the Pitkin's license bill
that appears in the issue of the follow
ing day, in which, after pronouncing
the prOhibitory law of this state a fail
ure, the editor says of the bill:
1t seems to us it would be difficult to
frame law that would more effectu-
ally restrain the sale of Intoxicating
liquors. 1t certainly seems to
us that it is in the interest of practical
temperance that a trial be made of
such optional measures. No harm can
be done, and much good, it is more
than probable will be accomplished.
The Montpelier Argus has always
been outspoken in its advocacy of a
license law. Now the Waterman steps
down to the same plane, thus leaving
the friends of prohibition in the repub
lican party without representation at
the capital.
This question at once arises AS
supposed exponent of the best element
of the republican party of Vermont,
does the Montpelier Waterman in es-
pOusing the cause of license indicate
the trend of public opinion in this
state on the temperance question We
do not, we cannot believe it. Neither
do we find any warrant in Gov. Orms-
bees inaugural two years ago for the
Watchman's statement, that he plainly
intimates therein his belief that ga
stringent license law would more effec-
tually reach the end desired by the
friends of temperance )" nor anything
in Gov. Dillingham's utterances or acts
that will warrant the adrOit use by the
Waterman of his name in this connec-
ton.
But we are compelled to admit that
the tone of the Watchman's articles,
and the absence of any opposition thus
far shown toward the Pitkin bill, are
very significant as indicating less and
less objection on the part of the press
and of succeeding legislatures to the
proposed experiment. Indeed, an in
telligent Vermont correspondent of a
Massachusetts paper says, that the
proposed license law sis finding con-
siderable favor among the lawmakers
as well as among many temperance ad-
vOcates, who believe its provisions
worth trying and to that end urge its
passage"
Do the friends of prohibition recog-
nize the drift of affairsf The recon-
mendation of Gov. Ormsbee in his in
augural that the present prohibitory
law be so amended that the penalty
provided for a first conviction should
include short term of imprisonment,
and the opinion expressed by Gov.
Dillingham; in his inaugural, that the
time has come when a sentence of inn
prisOnment should follow the first con-
are both disregarded by these
ardent friends of temperance, while a
license law finds willing supporters.
They Miss Judge Poland.
Burlington Clipper.