The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1888-10-31

III. ,eox..o.,., ..a.to. ~ H. p..>,s.t
Pn'"' uo'"o.v pAs'o' " '"0 Dap'.es
Church IN THIS city,l SENDS us pamphlet
entitled Temperance in Politics." pa
per read before the PRESBYTERIAN Minis.
80. As.oo;a,,o, 80 ph,,odo,r,,;a oo,o,,ar
so's .Ao'oo'as,U" np' 1880,
@Sd, Dy nov. HehTy r. Lee anu puohsneu
by request of the Association, which he
very iustly commends, We have not
80. -. I. an,;ra hnt o;vo sor,o o,o,,
.oo"' 'o' y '"'' Wv s'' Sos f"o'"-
tions, viz;
1t is matter Of great joy and gratitude
TO God that a majority of voters, in many
of our States, have come to favor Prohi-
ton. We want this wherever 1t can be
had, and fairly enforced. We want 1t,
not because it really prohibits, heaven
knows it does not, and it's great pity
any one should so claim; but where fairly
enforced it restricts and limits the evil
more than any other form OF law; and
then 1t is full expression of what we
feel ought to be. We dislike half way
measures, when we can avoid them. and
do our whole duty. It's hard work to
save two men and let the third drown.
The great majority of prohibitionists,
however, are glad to take all they can get.
They have a common sense notion that
"half loaf is better than no bread"
Seeing three men IN the water, they hate
to let either Of them drown, but they
late still more to see them all drown.
Where the voters will not yet adopt or
the people will not yet sustain prohibit.
tion, we are glad to diminish the traffic
and It's evils by restrictions and Sgula-
tions and to weigh down the remnant with
the burdens of tax they ought to bear. A
small, but respected minority say "No,
Prohibition or Nothing! To regulate the
trade Is to sanction its sins. To restrict
it by law that still permits certain per-
sons to sell, Is to enter into alliance with
crime" The size and mischievous effects
of this sad mistake are not diminished by
its good motives, or its plausibility.
"What ! license iniquityf" The sound
of word seems to scare them quite
away from the facts and practical bearing
and real morals of the case. They forget
that the makers of these restrictive laws
found the liquor traffic as solid in its legal
status, aud as free and open to everybody,
as any business or industry in the land.
These laws open no door they do not,
they could not, give liberty to that which
was already free. So that they are all
really restrictive laws and the word
s'license, /" In the sense which makes that
word such q terror, Is simply misnomer,
when applied to these laws. For example,
the fret words of the Brooks Bill (now in
force In our state), are: sit shall be I'M
lawful to keep or maintain any house,
room, or place to sell or give away any
form of Intoxicating drinks, except as
herein specified" So that the first clause
is vast prohibition.
Out Of hundreds of thousands of houses
and places, all are shut off but about
1900 and out of a million Of people, only
1900 are left free to sell and the remain
der OF the law Is occupied with the purpose
Of burdening, restricting, and regulating
this remnant. Il opens no door; and in
stead Of giving liberty to sell, where that
liberty did not already exist, It takes
away that liberty from 800 out OF every
1000, and actually closes over 5000 saloons
in Philadelphia alone. or course, there
was a restrictive law 10 force before this,
but very inferior. This takes the whole
matter up dc nouo, and 10 dead earnest.
And here wish to give personal testi-
mony as to the effects OF this so-called
High License Law. Having served a. a.