The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-03-16

always surreptitiously obtained, for
which no statistics are given. There
are sources of supply which quote no
figures nor are they to be obtained.
But there is the admission that even
under prohibition laws. enforced as
well as they can be. 1853 barrels of
beer were sold in Kansas in 1892, and
2,677 barrels in 1893 Which shows that,
as claimed, prohibition does not GRO
hibit, while it does not show the actual
consumption of either malt or spurious
liquors in the state, but only that
which was known to be sold.
The opponents of prohibition do not
intend that any law is to be aban-
doned because it does not entirely pre-
vent the crime which it was enacted to
suppress. But they do affirm that as
to the liquor traffic it is very much of
a farce That the evidences are COM
plete which show that the law is so
extensively aevaded as to make it a
matter OF ridicule. That liquor can be
had as a beverage in every state that
has prohibition on it's statute books,
and that drinking goes on there all the
same for the laws which but compare
lively few regard as binding.
The allusion to Iowa is unfortunate
for our correspondent, because that
state has abandoned the untenable
theory and it's practice, after demon
strating that it is a failure. 1t always
will be wherever the majority of the
people are opposed to it in their hearts
and show their opposition in their
deeds.
The revenue part of the argument
which our Incorporate prohibitionist
denounces as too contemplate to de-
serve attention. is nevertheless a rea-
! sonable question to consider. It has
been demonstrated that high license
offers a rational restriction on the
liquor traffic. 1t makes the indulgence
in articles which our prohibitionist
friends denounce as pernicious, con-
tribute to the public treasury Suppose
the sale of intoXicants is forbidden in
the state. There is nothing to prevent
their. sale in Idaho, Wyoming, Arizona,
Nevada and California, Any amount
can be bought there and used in Utah.
The revenue from license would be lost
to Utah and gained where the pur-
chase was made. What would be the
good of that?
Temperance, or the moderate Use of
anything, liquid stimulants included,
and prohibition are entirely antagonis-
tic terms. There is nothing temperate
about prohibition, not even the attacks
of its advocates upon those who differ
with them. Moderation in the indul-
gence of an appetite" which has ex-
listed from the earliest times and
among all races, is as asserted, "a ques-
ton of deep concern" But prohibition
is not moderation, it is an abortive at
tempt at complete suppression of
something that is rot suppressable.
The effects of intemperance which
are made TO do so much hard duty for
the prohibitionists have nothing to do
with the real question in controversy.
Nobody denies the evil that is pic
tured. Nobody advocates intemperance,
or drunkenness, which is the most di-
rect term for the same thing. On the
contrary, drunkenness is punisha BILE in
every civilized community. for the rea-
son that it is an offense against the
public. An appetite which when ap-
peased in moderation IS not criminal,
becomes criminal only when it breaks
out into overt acts against peace and
good order"
When protectionists charge that sell
ing intoxicants is crime the same as
drunkenness or worse, they become If
rational, and when they talk of "the
unscrupulousness of liquor-dealers
4c
and foolish and nearly as vicious as
the common drunkard There are gem
tlemen who deal in liquors who are
far more honorable and benevolent and
temperate than many of their sancti-
monious, strait-laced and puritanical
accusers.
There are men who deal in wines
and liquors that never drink a drop
of anything intoxicating. There are
others who do but never get drunk.
They pay their taxes, discharge their
honest debts and mind their own bust
ness. They never force anybody to
drink nor try to compel other people
to conform to their notions.
That there are evil men in the liquor
business we do not dispute. That some
of them use a corrupt influence in
politics is no doubt correct. But to
class all liquor dealers in that cate
CORY is o1e Of the incorporate methods
of the prohibitionist.
If the only remedy for the evils of
intemperance is the removal of the
cause, as stated in the article we pub
lish, and that cause is the traffic in
intoxicants, then the only remedy for
the numerous evils of gluttony is to
forbid the sale Of all food. The great
error in the prohibition logic is in
charging the evils which are due to
over indulgence n the sale of the
thing indulged in, instead of the excess
of its use.
There are thousands of morphine |
fiends, opium fiends, tea inebriates, !
physical wrecks ruined by other evil
habits. On the logic of prohibition
the wrong is in the sale of the arti-
cles instead of the vicious habits of
the victims to self indulgence. The |
very principle of prohibition is wrong, |
because it strikes at the free agency |
of man and the liberty of the citizen.
On prohibition reasoning Deity is to
blame for all the ills of the fall of
man, for planting the tree that brought |