The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1895-01-18
General Dow Vigorously Advocates
Further Liquor Legislation.
SEALS ARE A MENACE TO CASCO
BAY FISHERIES.
The Temporary Home Will Receive But
$1.oO0-Something About the New
Soldiers Home For Which $4,000 is
Asked-Yesterdays Business.
Especial to the PRESS. J

Especial to the PRESS.)
Augusta, January ia large audience
heard Gen. Neal Dow advocate changes In
the liquor law before the ten france CON-
mittee this afternoon. Gen. Dow was the
first speaker. lis description of rum shop
as drunkard's factory where they turned
out the finished product, created consider
able amusement. He spoke substantially
as follows:
= | was. here in 1850, right here, and We
thought then that we had public opinion
with us on the liquor question. but when we
went to the polls we were beaten two to
one. The men who beat us were largely
country traders and the keepers of rum
hotels. and only five of them, only five,
were returned. In 1851, we tried again and
/ stood right here once more. On the eve
ming before the last day of the session
stood right here and explained what has
since been known as the Maine law. After
I had explained the law, Mr.. Smith, the
chairman of the committee proposed that
the law be passed rs presented, and it was
unanimously voted. He added that to pass
the law it must be printed on the seats OF
the members in the morning. This was
done, and the bill was correctly printed and
it then became a law without the dotting
of an j or the crossing of t. 1t is law
which has made Maine famuos over all the
civilized world.
Now OH the 18th day of January. 1894. l
stood here again. 1t is said to be a hard
thing to stop the crime of liquor selling, but
it is really the easiest crime to prevent, be-
cause you can find place where rum is sold
simply by following the men who go there.
lust as you can find the hive by tracing the
bees. But we have not put the grog shops
down. and why? Because some of our legis-
latures have shown themselves more eager
to protect the grog shops against the PEOPLE
than the people against the liquor traffic,
and hope the reporters will put that down
just as l say it,. hope that shall hurt no.
body's feelings when say that the legisla-
ure of 1888 was one of the most peculiar
legislatures We ever had. One OF It's COM
mittecs strove hard TO pass law to allow
any person calling himself druggist to sell
rum. did not believe that any committee
would recommend that law. and told gen.
tleman was not going to the hearing be-
cause did not believe that the members OF
the committee would be such thund erlng
fools as 10 report that bill. did 60 to the
hearing and told that story. The chairman
asked me why had come then and ! said
! had changed my mind. Every body laughed
but the chairman. He didn't laugh.
In 1891, the legislature passed a law
making the Illegal transportation Of liquor
punishable by fine and one years in
prisonment. But certain committee of the
legislature of 1898 got a communication from
Chief Justice Peters saying that the law
If hacauGe the nunlSh-
ment was an excessive one. Now. gentle
men of the committee, there is not word
in the Constitution that will bear that con
struction, not one. Finally, the last legis-
Iature fixed the penalty for Illegal transport
tation of liquor at a fine of not less than
s nor more than $4,000 and there it is
now. The people engaged in the illegal
TRANSFORMATION of liquor do not mind the
fines. The business is profitable one. and
they can afford to pay fines. but they don't
like 20 go to jail. They tell me when talk
with them. They say life is too short to
spend much of it in Jail and say, That's
just where we want to put you'll"
Gen. Dow then read to the committee the
changes lie advocates in the law, which
have already been published in the PRESS.
Concerning the amendment restoring the
penalties of 1891 for Illegal transportation,
Gen. Dow said he had made it, for the first
conviction, $500 fine and one years i'm
prisonment. Why not make it a year? Be-
cause the chief justice might persuade the
majority of the Supreme court that the law
is unconstitutional. am afraid the reporters
won't put down what say in regard to the
chief Justice For second offence, the
penalty is made $50 fine and years I'M