The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1888-04-17
THE LIQUOR PROBLEM VII.

the GAZETTE under the above head
ing the writer has attempted to pre-
sent the most reliable testimony avail
able as 10 the effects of prOhibitory
legislation in different places where
the experiment has been recently
tried. He has called attention to only
one case in which he believes the law
to be thoroughly enforced. That was
the town OF Grinnell. In Iowa the
law j. by no means thoroughly en-
forced. there being about 400 places in
the State where liquor is sold openly,
besides the clandestine dealers dens.
In Kansas liquor is sold contrary to
the law, as indicated by Governor
Martins letter, from which lengthy
quotations were made. In Atlanta
prohibition was only partially enacted
and somewhat less enforced. Yet in
all Of these places the testimony is
overwhelming that just in proportion
as the law j. enforced, in that proper
tion crime and poverty decrease.
Efforts have been made TO throw
discredit upon prohibition, wherever
the experiment has been tried, by
emphasizing the fact that such laws
are violated. But it is interesting to
note the character of the men who
thus argue that prohibition does not
prohibit and that the laws ought to be
abolished. | am in a position to state
with reasonable certainty that nearly
every former liquor dealer in Iowa
and nearly all of their friends oppose
prohibition, and give as reason for
doing so that the law is not and cannot
be enforced. While a great majority
OF those who oppose L. liquor trade
rs hostile to society, are anxious to
keep the statute on the books, believ-
ing that the law, enforced as il is, is
the best means of diminishing the
evils of the liquor trade In other
words, those who wish the law en-
forced are reasonably well satisfied
with the enforcement of it; while
those who do not wish it enforced are
making dreadfully wry faces, as they
say. because the law is not and cannot
be enforced And Iowa is not the
only place where such a state of af-
fairs exists.
Great extremes are often resOrted to
to prove that prohibition does not pro-
hibit The internal revenue argument
was completely met by Governor
Larrabee in the language quoted in a
former paper. The same answer APP
plies all over the United States. An
other argument which has gone so out
of date that it is hardly worth while to
answer il, is that United States Ii
censes have frequently been issued to
men living in prohibition States, and
that in great numbers in some cases.
This has been met with the statement
that officers of the United States Rev
enue have often agreed to overlook an
offense of the kind provided the person
Immediately procure a license. Thus
the number of licenses issued indicated
with tolerable accuracy the number of
men convicted by the State authorities
of the ofiense of selling liquor.
After all that has been said, the pro-
hibitoTy laws of the various States,
counties, and towns are, probably, as
well enforced, on the average, as are
our laws against gambling, and much
better than our statutes based upon the
Seventh Law of Moses.
/ now come to the last question
which propose to discuss in this series
of papers, /. e, Can Hawaii prohibit
the general importation and sale of in
toXicating liquors if she choose so to
d02 The French treaty is often cited
as an insuperable barrier, and it has
frequently been so regarded by those
who favor more restrictive measures.
That treaty provides, in part, as fol-
lows:
+" Article y. 1t is agreed;
Il. That the importation and the
sale of wines and brandies of French
origin shall not be prohibited in the
Hawaiian Islands,
Hawaii must certainly keep all her
treaty obligations in good faith. Large
countries may shuttle and evade, but
they alone have that privilege. 1t is
I,
that we must forever abide by the
above provision. Further on in the
same treaty we read:
" Article NXVI. The present treaty
shall be in force for ten years, count
ing from the day of exchange of the
notifications, and if, in one year before
the expiration OF this term, neither the
one nor the other of the two contract
ing parties announce by an official
declaration its intention that it shall
cease to have effect, the said treaty will
remain still obligatory during one
wear, and so Onwards until the eXpira-
ton of the twelve months which shall
follow the official declaration in qUes-
ton, at whatever time it may be made.
"It is we'll understood that in case
this declaration come to be made by one
or other of the contracting parties, the
provisions OF the treaty, relative to
trade and navigation, and contained
in articles S, 9, 10, II, u, Is, II and
24, shall be alone considered as having
ceased and expired, but that, in regard
10 other articles, the said treaty shall
remain, nevertheless, peTpetually Obli
gatory, and cannot be modified except
by mutual agreement between the two
contracting paTties.n
IIaH Y frnn 70
rid herself of so much of the treaty as
refers to the liquor problem at any time
she chooses, on years notice. The
other matters which this part of the
treaty would carry with it, moreover,
are matters of no great Importance. Be
sides there would probably be no diff
Guilty in adjusting them on a satisfac-
tory basis if they We're separated from
the matters of wines and brandies