Sacramento daily record-union., 1888-12-08
WARNER MILLER ON HIGH LICENSE

In the North american ReuieW for Deem
Der Hon. Warner Miller has an essay en-
titled High License Justified" Mr., |
Miller has Just been defeated for Gov
ernor of New York upon the high license
issue. Liquor interests formed a solid
combination against him, and it was al
most resistless, such is the potency of busi
ness interests when combined against a
purely economic and moral reform which
has the backing only of philanthropy.
Mr.. Miller in defeat does not hesitate to
reafirm his position, and to deny the
justice of the verdict against him. His
views after the battle, therefore, become of
especial interest. In brief, he holds that
the uncontrolled or unregulated sale of
intoxicants is, by all civilized Govern
ments recognized as evil, to such an extent
that it must not be permitted without
some restrictive laws. These are of two
classes; license or taxation regulates under
well-ordered rules deemed essential for the
well-being of society: the other looks to
entire suppression of the business by con-
stitutional amendment. The advocates Of
the latter refused to cooperate with the
friends of the former in the late election
in New Nork. Their vote was exactly two
per cent. of the whole vote, and hence
they are unable to claim that any large
body of the people of the Empire State
now stand with them. Now, asks Mr..
Miller, the evils of the unrestricted traffic
being confessed by all, what steps ought
an intelligent people take in a corrective
direction
He replies by stating the fact to be that
the growing and the larger sentiment of
the entire country is in favor of high
license under strong law, carrying with
it severe penalties for violation of the
terms of license.
The plan is no longer an experiment, he
says. 1t is in several States and many
localities an accomplished fact, has stood
the test of severest trials, and has in every
case produced beneficial results in reduc-
ing the number of saloons, especially of
the lower and vile order Some reduc-
tions have been one-half in States, and in
cities considerably more, followed always
by reduction in crime and the cost it en-
tails. Mr.. Miller cites the instance of
Philadelphia, where the law has not yet
operated year, bat the commitments for
,f !
months, from June to September, were
4,027 less than in the corresponding period
of 1887, while the commitments to the
House of Correction In like contrasted
periods fell off GAG, and for the months
named the Sunday arrests for drunken
ness were 526 in 1887, and in 1888, under
high license, they amounted to but l46
The saloons there, in 1887, numbered g.
600; they are now less than 1900. The
reports from the State outside of Phila-
delphia are of similar character, and Mr..
Miller estimates the actual saving to the
people of the State in consequence, at a
million dollars.
Certainly such showings must command
respect as pure economies. They ought
not to get into the mysteries of the tenn
perance question at all, or to be involved
with any sentimental issues, but should
be considered solely in the economy Of
good government at low cost and with the
minimum of attaching evils Mr.. Miller
assures US that in nearly all the high
license States and cities the experience OF
Pennsylvania and Philadelphia has been
repeated. The general result is large
decrease in the number of saloons, of
crimes, of cases of gross drunkenness and
of municipal and county cost of govern
ment, and largely increased revenues and
consequent lessened general taxation. Ger
tainly these are attainments that no citizen
will decry.
Some statistics are given by Mr.. Miller
for municipal economists to study, thus
Omaha, fee $1,000 per annum, saloons,
to every 426 of population; Kansas City
$S45, / to every 800; San Francisco, fee
SS4, l to every 81; Philadelphia, fee be
fore high license, $50 and the saloons
numbered l to every 142 OF the popula-
ton; under high license the saloons are
to every ESQ of the population; Baltimore
fee $50, saloons, to every lis.
A feature of the system is referred
to by Mr.. Miller that we have not before
seen elaborated. He asserts that the re
ports all agree that the law takes the sa
loon out of politics, whereas it is known
fact that where there is no restriction the
saloon is in politics and in very many
cases controls parties, because the saloon
keeper feels it to be necessary to go into
the political field to control excise board
and keep down the license fee But where
it is fixed by law and the matter settled
the necessity ceases and the saloon-keepe,
gladly eschews interference in local polit
ical action, and ceases to contribute none,
to political workers and to do battle il
what before appeared to him to be sci
defense. Mr. Miller wisely concludes tha
no one viii deny that ii is great evil tt
have the government of anT community
fall under the control Of any one class tt
the exclusion Of all others. He expresse.
the belief that the political levy upon tn
$4,000 liquor-dealers of New York i
greater Tar than the license fee would b
under regulatiye system.
These statements from gentleman 5
well informed and who has made Stat
canvass upon the issue are entitled to pro
found consideration. They are not to b
nut lightly aside, nor classed with tn
sentimentalism of any reform. They ar
economic facts, to scout which Is evidenc