The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1891-08-06
NEMO's COMPLIMENTS TO ISIS.

DrODlDlllUu laws III Mdiuc uii uOt
and do not prohibit the sale and
drinking of liquor, wine or beer
Permit us to give you a few more
statistical facts from other States.
New Hampshire enacted a prohi-
bitory law in 1855 and has ever since
attempted to enforce it. The statis-
tics of the government, however,
show US that there are IO66 retail
and 7 wholesale liquor and 222 re-
tail and 65 wholesale beer dealers in
the State, or total of 1910 places
where liquor, wine and beer can be
had. Did the prohibition law pro-
hibit anything here?
Vermont passed prohibitory law
in 1858 and has attempted to enforce
it ever since. We, however, learn
from the government statistics that
there are 454 retail and 62 wholesale
liquor and Is wholesale beer dealers
in the State, or a total OF 529 places
paying the government license for
the purpose of supplying the thirsty.
Kansas, of course, is model pro-
hibition State-a least it was in
1880 to 1888. Permit us to trouble
YOU with a few statistical facts.
There were arrested for drunkenness
in Emporia, Kansas, in 1880, lO2
persons, in 1888 81 persons; in Par
sons IN 1880 80, in 1888, 80; in
Wyandotte in 1880 80, in 1888 6S;
in Topeka in 1880 1858, in 1883 39l;
in Lawrence in 1880 ll8, in 1883
1863; in Atchison in 1880 1925, in
1888, SOP; in Wichita in 1880 1856,
in 1888 1927; in Fort Scott in 1880
1872, in 1883 26S; in Leavenworth in
1880 23O, in 1883 AIS; making in
1880 total of 1869 and in 1883 of
1869 persons arrested for drunken
ness in the model prohibition State
BY examining the Government sta
tistics we ascertain that in 1880 there
were in the State 1921 retail and %
wholesale liquor dealers and III
retail beer dealers, or total Of 1868
places where liquor could be had.
In 1883, there were in the State
1904 retail and II wholesale liquor,
and 81 retail and % wholesale beer
dealers in the State, or a total of
1898, a gain of IS in three years,
and this in a prohibition State.
Iowa is another so-called prohibit
ton State, but the Government sta
tistics show us that there are 1858
saloon keepers and bar-tenderS in
that State. There are also 1872
brewers in the State.
From the above condensed state
ment of facts, it will be seen that
prohibition laws do not prohibit the
manufacture, sale or drinking of
liquor. We will now make a few as
sertions ourselves and will prove
them:
We claim that prohibition States
have more paupers than non prohibi
ton States.
Increase of Pauperism.-In 1880
the ratio of pauperism throughout
the United States was out of every
500 of the population.
In Maine the ratio of paupers was
out of every POP of the population
of that State (see Government Sta
tistics, Vol. 2, p. 1879. This was
more than double the average.
In New Hampshire it was to no
of the population, or more than three
times the average. In Vermont it
was to PIP of the population. In
Missouri, liberal State, it was to
every 1,2O4 of the population. This
shows that the prob bition State If
New Hampshire had 700 percent.
more pauperism than the State where
you can drink when and what you
please.
Maine had in Is 0 a population of
64S,9 1886 souls and 3,21l paupers.
Kentucky had population of
l,64S,G9O souls, or nearly three
times as many as Maine, yet the
State where everybody drinks had
only 2,059 paupers.
Indiana, with population of
1928, 3Ol, or three times as many as
Maine, had only the same number of
paupers.
We might continue these COMPARE
sons but it is not necessary. We
have shown enough to prove our as
sertion that prohibition States have
the most paupers and that prohibi-
ton legislation increases instead of
diminishes pauperism. We next as
sert that prohibition legislation in.
creases taxation.
Before Maine enacted prohibitory
law we ascertain from the census re-
port of 1850 that it cost the State 26
cents per head in taxes for the sup
port of paupers. In 1870 we learn
that it cost the State SO cents per
head, or more than double the
amount what it cost before prohibit
ton Legislation was introduced. In
New Hampshire, another prohibition
State, it cost before the prohlbitory
law was enacted 49 cents per head to
support the paupers of the State.
In 1870 it cost each taxpayer Is
cents.
In Vermont it cost before prohibit
ton 80 cents per capita; in 1870 it
cost "a cents; showing so far in