The record-union., 1896-04-05


ills it creates.
In signing the bill Governor Morton
declared it to be an experiment, and
that the cheapest and swiftest way to
settle the disturbing liquor question is
to give the bill fair trial. He added
that it changes the whole scheme and
system of liquor regulation in the
State. 1t abolishes all local license
boards and concentrates the jurisdic-
ton for issuance of licenses in one
State body. The Governor said this
much in favor of the bill:
Whether this is wise or not expert
ence can only demonstrate, but it is
an experiment worth trying, and I be-
lieve that if the design of this bill is
fairly worked out by competent and
faithful officers, it will produce result
SO beneficial that our people will not
be likely to wish to resume the system
of local supervision with which we are
SO familiar, and which in many respects
is SO unsatisfactory. The State is
amply justified in taking control by the
consideration that the effects of the use
of intoxicating liquors are not local.
but are widespread and far-reaching
and that the State itself is subjected
to large expenses in the creation and
maintenance Of institutions for the
care of unfortunates who suffer di-
rectly or indirectly from the effects of
the use of intoxicating liquors. Prob
ably the most sanguine advocates of
the present measure do not hope that
all the evils of intemperance will be
removed by it, but 1 think that it may
reasonably be expected that the num-
Der of places where Intoxicating Ii
quors may be purchased will be consid-
erably reduced.
That which is of greatest signifi-
canoe about all this upheaval in New
York; that which most impresses the
intelligence outside the smoke of the
recent battle in the Empire State is
this, that the outcome of the contest
is significant of the change going on in
the minds of the people regarding the
liquor traffic. Here we have the fore
| mcst State in the Union, largest in
population, wealth, commerce and po-
litical and social Importance coming to
the conclusion that the people of New
York in their State capacity must take
control Of the liquor traffic; that it is
neither feasible nor desirable to pro-
hibit it, but that it must come under
greater restraint and be removed so far
as is possible from interference in and
domination Of local politics, and that to
frnea =
| rate will not be tolerated.
This judgment by the people Of New
York must have a profound effect upon
other communities. We have, it is
true, spoken of division Of sentiment
among the people upon the "Raines
Bill" but this division related mainly
to methods and not to the question Of
regulation. One faction desired the
communities to retain control and
favored a law compelling them to make
it more stringent. Another desired the
State to take entire charge of regula-
ton, and this party won the day. An
| other class held that local option should
be the test, with local control if the
| traffic was permitted; the probitionists,
with their usual blindness, opposed
any thing. all things, that were not
absolutely prohibitory of the manu-
facture and SALE The high-license peo-
pie wished each community to control
the traffic, but wanted provision made
for high license, and regulations as
10 -
censes. The saloon-keepers themselves
divided in opinion as to what was best,
but the mass of them were in opposi-
ton to the measure that became the
| law.
1t is all significant Of the stirring up
| that is going on in the public mind
concerning the traffic, and the limita-
tions that must be put upon it's ca
| pacity for evil, without wholly pro-
hibiting 1t, which, wherever tried on
any large scale, has proved abortive.
The Raines bill Of New York pro-
hibits all selling of liquor on Sundays,
no matter where dispensed, save for
use in treatment Of disease by physi-
clans. 1t, of course, hits the clubs as
well as the saloons, and now there Is
| a roar along the whole line Of the high
toned clubs Of New York City. But why
| should there be any complaining? If
| the poor man is to be without his drinks
| in the saloon on Sunday, why shall not
| the club close its bar also, and the club
| man be likewise deprived of ardent
| spirits? AS one sensible club man of
| Brooklyn put it, There should be no
favoritism. We can get along without
our drinks just as well as Others" An
other added:
1 am inclined to believe that while
| the Raines law has many uncertain
| features 1t is not entirely without it's
merits. / thoroughly approve the prin-
| ciple which it observes in doing away
with all semblance of favoritism and
class legislation. Because a man may
happen to have 500, or ticket of club
membership in his pocket, there is no
| reason why he should be more highly
| favored than poorer man. Brooklyn S
| club members can get along without
| their drinks on Sundays, and / believe
| they should be compelled to do so, as
| well as persons not fortunate enough
| 70 get into the clubs. AS a rule, there
| has never been much drinking in our
| Brooklyn clubhouses on Sundays, and
| the new provision will not, in my esti-
nation, be hardship.
| That is sensible and will go long
way toward making the law popular.
1t is gratifying to learn that Brooklyn
| club men almost to a member express