The Portland daily press., 1893-02-17
Gen. Dow and the Druggist Bill.
To the Editor of the Press:
PORTLAND, MAINE, Feb. 18th

ton of Gen. Dow, relative to the Drug
gist Bill. am very sure that they arise
from misinformation.
Gen. Dow says: 1.-TWO attempts have
already been made upon the Legislature
by the druggists obtain legal permission
to sell intoxicants. On the first occasion
they obtained, l think, twenty
votes.''
Also ION those occasions great efforts
were made by the druggists to carry their
point
The first attempt, as far as know, at
any rate for years, to allow apothecaries
to sell liquors for medicinal purposes, in
this state was made in the Legislature Of
1885. The idea originated from an in
formal talk had one day, by the members
of the Committee on Temperance, at
that session.
A member of that committee was APP
pointed by Chairman Thaddeus Simon
ton to draft bill to carry out that idea.
The bill was drawn, submitted to the
committee and signed by seven of the
committee in favor, two against, while
one member stood neutral. The bill was
reported to the House as No. 1859. On
the day assigned it was discussed and
then voted upon, the vote standing, am
very sure over sixty, or lacking only
about fifteen of enough to pass the bill.
| That was the vote rather than twenty
| four as stated by Gen. Dow. The exact
vote can be known by consulting the House
Journal of that year.
The bill, then, originated unsought by
| the wicked druggists, as popularity
supposed. They in fact knew nothing of
| it until drafted. After the bill was
drafted several of the leading druggists
learned of its provisions and approved
them as did many temperance men at
sell only on the prescription of regular
practicing physician and yet the druggists
favored it.
In drawing, introducing, advocating
and voting upon that bill, know where
of speak, when say that neither lobby
ing, logrolling, the undue influence or
concentrated efforts of the druggists, or
any other class of people, played any
part So much then for the words "On
those occasions great efforts were made
| by the druggists to carry their point
| The principal ground upon which the
originators of the bill of 1885 believed
such measure necessary, was this:
| There are two purposes and only two,
for which the constitution and the
statute law of this state allow pure
liquors to be bought, viz. for medicinal
and for scientific purposes: they can be
bought only at town or city agency.
Now at that time there were less than
sixty agencies in the nearly six hundred
| towns and plantations in the state. What
is that but saying that there are only
sixty places where you can get intoxi-
eating liquors for even lawful purposes
without making the buyer and seller
liable to Imprisonment or fine or both?
Now no man in his waking moments,
would pretend to say, then or now, that
there was or is no liquor, for strictly
| legitimate purposes, sold in the towns
where there is no agency. 1t must be
bought under those circumstances lille
gally, although for a lawful purpose.
/ Where was the place that it was almost
! invariably bought? At the most logical
and convenient place, the apothecary's.
Public sentiment sustained it, for you
| seldom, if ever, found prosecution
where liquor was obtained for lawful
purpose under such circumstances.
/ So universally is this recognized
| that one of our evening dailies
/ last week editorially declared that
| that was the practice, and said that
apothecaries never refused in such case,
unless to bring the prohibitory law into
disrepute. With strange inconsistency,
it seems to me, the same paper opposes
the pending druggists bill because pub
| lie sentiment sustains and necessity COM
pels the illegal purchase of liquors for
| lawful uses, by the inhabitants of such
| towns.
The principal object, then, of the orig
| inators of the bill of 1885, was to rem
der legal the purchases of spurious
liquors for legitimate uses that public
sentiment and individual necessity de-
manded And the seven members of
that committe who signed and advocated
| that bill, did SO with as pure motives
and as honorable intentions to promote
the sobriety and good order of society, rs
any men that ever formulated pro-
| posed law.
Some of the good features of the bill
| of 1885 have been incorporated into the
present bill, but on, and think it an
| Important one, has been omitted, and
| that is that the apothecary shall keep
| duplicate record of all orders for liquor
| open to the inspection of the public at
all reasonable hours. That would en-
| able anyone to keep trace of the sup
posed individual who might go from
store to store and get quart from each,
as Gen. Dow suggests. If person
| should do so, when proven guilty,
| and anyone could collect evidence
| if he had access to the books
where every order for liquor of any
kind is recorded, let him suffer
the pains and penalties of, perjury, for