Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1895-11-18
BARTON, VERMONT. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 1S, 1895.

CAiO OJ % vi WOulOu anu CLlllOICu UIlO
sight of public drinking. Prohibition
has done more than this; it has so di-
mlnlshed, restrained and ostrac1zed
liquor selling that the generations
which have come up in Vermont in
the last years have been conspicuous
ly noted for sobriety, as compared
with the peoples of other states and
countries; and yet more, the prohib-
itory liquor law, which the Herald de-
nounces, has prevented the manufac-
ture of Intoxicating liquors through
out Vermont.
Prohibition prohibits. License, high
or low, would not even restrain; it
would encourage liquor drinking. Un-
der license there would be free flow
of rum; it's sale would be legaliZed
and protected; the seller could entice
man, woman or child to his gilded sa
loon; the poor man, whose earnings
are needed to clothe and feed his
children, would be invited and be the
honored guest, whose last penny would
swell the Golfers of the licensed seller.
The unlicensed seller could carry on
his ''bootleg'' business just the same
under license as under prohibition;
liquor sellers always evade law and
seek opportunities to sell.
If the Herald is correct as to the
number of men in this county who
hold United States licenses, there are
only eleven. Five of these are in
Barton. The Herald states that of the
434 licenses held in the state, as enum-
Grated by itself, not one covered a
town agent. In naming the licensed
sellers in Barton, the name of F. A.
Belknap appears. Mr.. Belknap, as
everybody here knows, is the town
agent, and the Herald shows it's own
ignorance of facts and refutes it's own
assertions, when it claims that town
agents were not counted. Itis just as
likely to be incorrect in other state
ments as it is in this one. We will be
generous and say that prohibition rab-
les, with which it is afflicted, has rem
dered it unfit to treat that subject at
all. Of the four other men who are
mentioned as carrying licenses, two
of them are druggists who do business
at Barton Landing; one is druggist
in this village, and one, Blanchard, is
groceryman and the seller of lot of
slosh called small drinks, and, doubt
less,a sly seller of Intoxicating liquor.
Mr.. .Blanchard's premises were search
ed recently and two gallons of liquor
were found; he was fined and is book
ed for Rutland if he persists in vio-
lating the law While we can not
vouch for all the druggists, not haV-
ing personal knowledge, we believe it
to be impossible to obtain liquors for
drinking purposes in the drug stores
in this village; the same is doubtless
true in the other village. AS has been
shown by the Burlington Free Press
and other papers, druggists who sell
alcoholic liquors for medicinal, chem
ical or mechanical purposes are re-
quired to take out licenses and our
druggists must carry them if they sell
alcohol for any Of these purposes.
We requote the lines below that our
OWN I0dOSIS, WHO huOW UIlO N1oN11Oh
and the editor much better than the
Herald does, may see what a crazy
editor can do when he launches out
into the field of uncertainty and false
hood:
"And the Monitor certainly will not
hunt. 1t dare not move. 1t does not
want the law enforced. It does not
want reputable men who sell liquor
and there are some in the list given
above-punished in any way for vio-
lating the law"
The Herald is evidently in bad
way, and we have some pity for the
editor. We recommend change Of
climate. If he is not getting enough
liquor in Rutland, under prohibition,
let him move into some region where
license prevails, land where every cor
ner is devoted to liquor selling; if he
is getting too much of the ardent, let
him move over into this salubrious
land of peace, prosperity and prohi
bitiOn.
Once more it is in order to ask why
Corbett and Fitzsimmons should have
been sent away into the demoralizing
wilds of Texas in order to fght,-as