Waterbury evening Democrat., 1889-09-25


 the Princeton Review, ''the ideal of Christian manhood is in spiritual and moral power; in inward gracious strength, not external safeguards; in the self-control of manly virtue, not in con- tinuous pupilage to superior restrictive negations; in the victory that over cometh the world, not the safety of the coward who runs away from the battle. ," Prohibition would compel men to be sober whether they would or not by abolishing the existence of liquor, which is not at all according to the scriptural or theological conception of Christian manliness and virtue which is ''strong in the Lord and in the power of his might, able to withstand all the fiery darts of the wicked one, and, having done all, to stand" Christian effort, Christian impulse, Christian teaching are discouraged by prohibition, since it's adoption and enforcement snap the springs of true Christian morality. Moral suasion has no place in the theory of prohibition, moral and spiritual forces arr set aside as of no value, and legal agencies are put before the powers and forces of Christian effort. It is calling on the law and the policeman's billy to do the work that belongs to the pulpit and the Christian church. The moral aspects of prohibition stamp it a failure and mistake.
 Prohibition is wrong ill the legislative and political pretensions it makes. It may be very seriously questioned whether, as matter of abstract justice, any body of men have right to pro- hibit the use of liquor. The prohibition ists themselves recognize this and so they do not attempt, unless by indirec- tion, to prohibit it's use. But by forbid ding the manufacture or sale of liquors they in reality prohibit their use and thus make an unwarranted in- reference with individual rights. Be- fore they assume the right to regulate by legislation the appetites of men it is incumbent on them to show that the proper indulgence of the appetite for liquor is crime. This they cannot do without unhinging the springs of Chris tian morality and scriptural teaching. As the proper use of liquor is no crime, as it cannot even be termed vice, legis- lation has no part in determining the individual rights of men to it's use. And if legislation cannot prohibit its use it follows that it cannot prohibit its manufacture and sale on which it's use necessarily depends. The prohibitionists are guilty of injustice against mems rights when they seek to set up their ex- treme sumptuary laws.
 And in fact legislation has never been able to make prohibition success. Wherever it has been tried it has proved failure. In Maine and Massachusetts, in Vermont and Rhode Island, in Iowa and Kansas prohibition has been conspicu- ous and significant failure. Liquor can be had as plentifully in Maine or Yer mont as it can in Connecticut, and it can be procured as easily in Iowa or Kansas as in Kentucky or Missouri. Mir William P. Tomlinson of Topeka, who is now in this state, himself total abstainer and former advocate of prohibition, is authority for the statement that 'fronl temperance standpoint prohibition in Kansas and ill every other state where the experience has been tried has proved an utter failure. whether considered from moral, legal or financial standpoint. And there is plenty of other evidence tc similar effect. The actual operation o1 prohibition in the states where it has been tried has been disastrous to the claims of it's advocates and defenders. Ii cannot be made to prohibit, ,and the teach ings of experience lead irresistibly to the conclusion that prohibition is a failure and a mistake.
 It is something for the people of Con necticut to consider seriously whether they are willing to try an experiment that has nothing but the theories o1 fanatics to commend it. It is some thing for them to consider whether they are willing to surrender their present | system of free rum, unlicensed grog geries and all the evils that they them selves are accustomed to picture as pro ceeding from the use of liquor. It i. something for them to consider whether they want to surrender the revenuel that come from the sale of licenses fol a sentimental trial of an experiment that must inevitably be a failure Il is something for them to consider whether they are willing that SO un warranted an interference with thei
 personal and individual rights be toler ated by the supreme law of the state
 When they consider these things w,
 believe they will agree with us that pro
 hibition, from whatever standpoint i may be regarded, is failure and mis