The Portland daily press., 1890-01-11
Concerning Prohibition.

Of course the Bangor liquor episode has
been seized upon by the opponents of prohi-
billion in ether States and paraded as show
ing the futility Of that methodlof suppress
ing the liquor traffic. 1t is the misfortune
of prohibition that 1t is judged by different
standard from that applied to any
other measure for suppressing the
liquer trafiic-indeed we may 60 further
and say that 1t is judged by higher
Standard than any measure for the supprts-
sion of any evil under the sun. When the
issue Is between high license and low license
the inquiry is, which will do the more to
suppress the traffic. But when prohibition
is under discussion the comparative method
is entirely:lost sight Of. As between prohi-
bltion and:high license the question should
be, which will be the more effectual, Just as
it is between high license and low license.
But as matter of fact the question is never
put this way. Prohibition is condemned
simply because it does not accomplish all its
name implies; and on this judgment we are
asked to substitute for 1t high license. This
manner of judging prohibition Is partly the
FAULT of its friends. In spite of long expert
ence with the prohibitory liquor law, and all
other laws which aim at the CON-
plete suppression of the evil against which
they are aimed, they have continued
to hold 1t up as measure of complete sup
preston, when, In the light of all past HIS
tory of such enactments, it ought never to
have been regarded as anything more than
measure of partial efficacy. This conduct
has enabled its enemies to set
up, with good deal of plausi-
bility, the test of complete suppression, and
OF course judged by this standard 1t has been
easy enough to show that prohibition was
failure. While mems appetites remain as at
present. 1t is useless to expect complete ex-
tinguishment Of the liquor traffic Greed for
gain may be depended on to always tempt
somebody to supply the demand In spite of
prohibitiye laws. If long terms.in the peni-
Tertiary do not entirely deter men from
house breaking and from arson, crimes
which are abhorrent to substantially the
whole community, it is useless to expect that
any punishment we are ever likely to put
upon the statute book and be able TO EN-
force will entirely prevent men from COM
hitting the crime of rumselling, a crime
which very considerable part of the CON-
munity continually connives at.
The sooner the friends Of prohibition In
Maine abandon all hope that 1t will ever be
ompletely effective, while human passions
nd appetites are what they are today, and
~onfine themselves to claiming that under
all the circumstances, 1t will accomplish
more restriction of the liquor traffic than any
other measure yet invented, the sooner they
will compel its enemies to Judge 1t fairly.
Judged by the test of complete suppress
sion 1t is, as its enemies say, failure
Judged however, by the comparative test,
which is the only fair one, it has been dem.
onstrated by actual trial to be superior in
this State at least to high license. We had
high license here for some years,
and the universal testimony of people who
remember its working is that it effected
much smaller restriction in the liquor traffic
than prohibition has done. We are not pre-
pared to say that there may not be places in
this State where public sentiment SO feebly
supports the prohibitory law that high
license law would be more effective, but in
the great majority Of the towns Of the State
the case is otherwise. That being SO
how absurd 1t is to ask the people of Maine
to substitute for the present law measure
which experience has shown to be less eff
fective simply because the present one is not
completely effective.