The Portland daily press., 1893-01-27


Liquor Agency an Outrageous and
Notorious Nuisance-Mr. Heath Argues
for the Bill
Especial to the Press.1
AUGUSTA, January 26.-.The hearing
on the druggists bill today was largely
attende !. A. G. Sehlotterbeck, D. w.
Haseltine, E. S. Everett of Portland, G..
H. Sawyer and Mr.. Cakes of Saeo,
Herschel Boynton of Biddeford, and c..
W. Partridge of Augusta were among
the druggists present. Hon. Neal Dow
of course was on the ground, and it is
needless to say that he was not among
the petitioners The committee an
nounced that they had decided to divide
the time, giving petitioners and remon-
strants an hour and half each.
Hon. Herbert NJ. Heath opened the
case for the petitioners. He regretted
the absence Of Judge Synonds of Port
land, who had given the matter great at
tention. A bill has been drawn which
the gentlemen who have studied it be-
1ltt0 W DC COASllUllttOIdA III PSA4SNO
harmony with the policy of the state.
Mr.. Heath spoke OF the provision for
liquor agencies which has always been
in the Maine law and which shows that
the sale of Intoxicating liquors for me-
dicinal purposes has been always recog-
nized in the Maine law, In all the legis-
lation on this subject, and for nearly
40 years every legislature has taken
band in building up our present sys-
4em of prohibitory law, this provision
for the maintenance of liquor agencies
has been allowed to remain. This honor
able court, as do the law courts, may
take judicial notice Of the fact that the
liquor agencies are a failure. Now it is
proposed to supplement- this system OF
agencies by permitting druggists to sell
liquors for medicinal purposes only.
Mr.. Heath then read the bill. He sug-
gested as he went along that the penalty
was 500 fine and 30 days imprisonment for
the violation Of the act by persons bny
ing liquor.
Now, said Mr.. Heath, there are some
gentlemen here who have made this
why the bill should be passed. A
measure more stringent, more carefully
guarded could not be found in any state.
Mr.. g. w. Partridge of Augusta was
the first witness for the petitioners. He
spoke of the desire of the druggists to
secure measure which should enable
druggists to carry on all branches of
their legitimate business and maintain
their self respect. This bill had been
agreed upon among the druggists by
mutual concessions. They had then
secured the services of gentleman
friendly to prohibition to draft the bill
in form for presentation to the legisla-
ture. Mr.. Partridge spoke or the strin-
gent provisions of the bill, mentioning
the penalt es imposed of both vender
and purchaser, the loss of the registra-
ton certificates of druggists guilty of
violating it, etc.
Mr. E. Everett of Portland. was the
next speaker. He said that he should
not appear before this committee unless
convinced by a lifelong experience in the
drug business that the position of the
druggists was right, He spoke OF the
confidence necessarily placed in the abili-
ty and knowledge of druggists by those
who bought deadly poison of them. In
cases of sickness, the druggist comes af-
ter he physician and the clergyman in
your thoughts. Mr.. Everett believed
that the place to buy liquors for medi-
cine was where other medicines were
sold. He knew that there were drug
gists in whom no confidence should be
placed, as there were also grocers and
dry goods dealers, but this was not an
argument against the bill. Me. Everett
spoke of the sentiment in favor of the
bill among physicians. Liquor agencies,
he said, being only open at certain hours
did not NEE the demand in large num-
Der of urgent cases. Justices of the
courts, men opposed to liquor drinking,
had time and again been parties to viola
tons of The law when they needed liquors
for medicine There was also strong
sentiment in favor of this bill among
temperance people. Volney B. Gushing,
the noted temperance leader, was an adj
vocate of it; SO was Rev. Samuel F.
had in the last 20 years, raised many
fallen men from the gutter who we're
now living monuments to him. If such
leaders as these were in favor of the
bill, Mr.. Everett believed that many of
the rank and file were always found in
line with their leaders. Mr.. Everett in
conclusion said that it was now the case
that druggist was liable to be classed
in the public mind with rumseller. The
druggists reputation was as dear to
him as was that of any man.
The petitioners rested their case here
and the other side began. State Senator
Stewart of York county began for the
other side. Up to this point the dis
cussion had not bern personal nature.
Mr.. Stewart proceeded to Introduce the
personal element. He said that he re-
garded with suspicion gentleman who
like the last speaker said he could not
conduct his business without being
classed with outlawed men. He was
afraid of such men, and the measures
which they introduced. He referred to
the statement of the President of the
Pharmaceutical Association two years
ago that prohibition did prohibit the sell
ing of liquor by one respectable man to
another respectable man. This was the
law which had nullified prohibition in
Iowa. 1t was called stronger law than
the Kansas law, but that required
a bond of $500. Mr.. Stewart then
told a story. This is the
story. A man in his town said the 9TH
er day that he hoped to Cd the bill
would pass because then he could get
liquor at home and go on HI of a
time. Mr.. Stewart then compared this