The Londonderry sifter. (South Londonderry, Vt.) 1883-19??, 1896-05-15
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
Brief statement of the Facts Before thu
TrIu


Brief statement of the Facts Before the
Trial.
The $4,000 libel suit brought by Gov.
Woodbury. against THE RUTLAND HERALD
has become well known in a general way
very widely. Its history is brief
The whole trouble grew out of what is
known as the "Howe case" B. G. Howe,
prominent citizen of st. Johnsbury, was
sentenced to the house of correction for vio-
lating the prohibtory law and strong petit
ton was presented to Gov. Woodbury. ask
ing for his pardon, which was refused. The
HERALD had been printing editorial articles
urging that under the terms of the Vermont
prohbitory law, reputable and respected cili-
Zens all over the state were In fact Offenders
and it repeatedly referred to this GLOVE
case" in support of its argument. In doing
this it printed two paragraphs, as follows
"Suppose that the St. Johnsbury experience
were repeated in other places all over the
statc-how would the house of correction
look Who keep and own the hotels in Rut-
land and Burlington and Bennington and
Middlebury and Vergennes and St. Albans
and Newport and Montpelier and Woodstock
and Bratteboro and so on: Rum is sold in
every one of them every day in the year and
many times a day, and every keeper and
owner is rumscller in fact and under the
law Rutland HERALD, July II, 1895.
Gov. Woodbury. himself owns the Van
Ness house at Burlington and has owned it a
long time. We believe that he also owns the
building across the street which contains
drug store. Nobody thinks the worse of him
for that--of course not-and all over the
state men highly esteemed and universally
trusted have similar Interests Rutland
HERALD, July Is, 1885,"
The responses to these paragraphs, with
results, appear in the following articles from
the HERALD
From the Rutland Herald for August 8 1895.
Gov. woodbury. Rumseller-Pre-
liminary.
"TuE RUTLAND HERALD has been for
many years the constant opponent of the pro-
hibitory law and the leading organ of the
rum,ellers in and out of Vermont who
would like TO see this state opened to the
free sale of liquor. Its vaporings and vitu-
peration have had no appreciate effect in
Vermont in the direction of any weakening
of the law; but they often serve to hold the
state up to unj Just cOntumely in other COM
munites.
pretty generally hate our state because of its
political seadfastness and are glad to print
ANYTHING, true or false, to its discredt.
Whiskey organs everywhere of course do the
same and the HERALD's ISLANDERS of good
citizens and of the people of Vermont thus
get much wider circulation in other states
than in our own.
THE recent sentence of St. J0hnsbury
hotel keeper for numerous violations of the
law, aud the refusal of the governor to par
don him, have stirred the HERALD up to
fresh outbursts of malignant SANDER. 1t has
gone to the length of declaring that if the
prohibitorv law of Vermont we impartially
enforced half of the prominent citizens Of
the state, including the governor, would be
in prison. A weekly paper In Rutland en-
larged upon this by asserting that "no man
in Vermont has made more money out of the
liquor business than our present governor"
and that she owned two hotels where ele-
CANT bars were run night and day and Sun
days" The paper took back the statement
in its next weekly issue; but the correction
will never overtake the original lie, and this
will circulate, no doubt, for many years, in
the barrocms and in the columns of organs OF
he liquor traffic.
This is not the worst of it. Papers which
have no political or business interests to
serve accept these ISLANDERS as true. For in
stance, here is an extract from recent
editorial in the Washington, d. c.. POST
''Now If the editor of the Washington Post
will come to Vermont or seek information
from responsible and truthful sources he will
see that he has printed as outrageous a SIAN
der concerning the state of Vermont as ever
was circulated concerning any decent and
well-ordered community. The assertion
that nearly every man of any means in thu
state of Vermont is rumseller is ridicu
lousy false. The man who makes it shoulC
,tnhr Il 4
every third person in the state is a thief, ant
every fourth man a murderer, and one state
ment would be as true as the other. If thu
exact facts could be obtained, we have II,
doubt that they would show that there ar,
fewer persons engaged in, or connected
directly or indirectly with, the traffic il
intoxicating liquors in Vermont, than in an,
other community of the same numbers in an,
civilized country on the globe. The assertion
that the governor Of Vermont is a rumselle
and lawbreaker Is also a false and out
rageouS libel. Among the various building
owned by Gov. Woodbury. In this city IL
hotel; but il has no bar. Liquor is not sol,
in 1t and never has been during his owner
ship of it. The governor has political an
other opponents, who would be very glad
they could have the hotel he owns prosecute
for violating the pr0hibitory law. No sue
prosecution has occurred, because there ha
been no violation of the law on which t
base it.
These are the plain facts-known to ever
intelligent person here. our state is malignet
aud its governor is slandered, because he
it, chief magistrate and as part Of the sam
campaign of SANDER.
Furthermore the enactment and supper
of the pr0hibitorv law in this state is by n
means the work of any radical minority
1t has the steady, unfiinching support of tt
great majority of the Order-loviDg and ten
perate citizens, because they have found it
be the most effective statutory measure fC
the repression of crime and pauperism tn
has been tried In this state. The law pr
vdes for the legal sale of alcohol and iquo
for necessary and proper purposes. medicin
and otherwise, in every town. 1t punish
drunkenness and the traffic which max
drunkards and paupers. 1t may not be Il
best law for every state or city, in u
present conditions of society-though Il
progress seems to be toward prohibition
many states Of the Union, and in some cou
tries of Europe-but for this state or rur
towns and small villages ii has proved, in
years trial, to be more practicable and mo
effective as restriction of the sale Of into1