The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1897-12-10

In discussing High License III its a!
plication 20 the present conditions, ie;
us face the facts, - we find them, i'n'.
not try TO convince TN worit, That
those who happen to differ with our
side of the case are suitable subjects
for scurrility and abuse.
Truth can not he destroyed, facts
will remain facts, and the laws Of ma
ture can never he repealed.
\ newspaper cannot state, as fact,
what the Legislature will, or will not
do, but we believe it will enact such
law as will conform to the wishes OF
the people.
tn .EgiH has an abiding conviction
that it is on the right side OF the ques-
ton. and is ready and willing to give
the reasons for the faith that is in 1T.
If we believed that prohibition, in
the circumstances, was the proper solu-
ton of the problem, and that it had
brought such good results to Hartford
county, and yet, we failed TO advocate
it for the whole State and Country at
large; we must confess, that our posi-
ton would be 50 thoroughly incon-
sistent as to forfeit the confidence of
the people, and would merit thei:
disregard for any argument we might
make.
For nearly sixteen years prohi-
bition law has been in existence in the
county, and yet, can any man truth
fully say that drunkenness has de.
creased or that drinking has diminish
ed i'll Bel Air? There were sober com
munities in the county before the law
was enacted, and there are nOn-drink-
ing neighborhoods now, and they
would be so, law or no law. We have
men who never got drunk until after
the law took effect, and there are
those who drank as much and as often
as they wished, before the law was
passed, and they still continue to do
so
So it was, and is, and will be. Some
in accordance with the scriptural text,
take wine for the stomach's sake"
while others, refusing to turn away
from the wine when it is red,n drink
it just as they find it; and still Others,
who imbibe because their fellow man
says they shall not do so.
Can this state OF affairs be swept
away by any enactment of man, or
can the use of liquor be restrained by
abusing those who contend that pro-
hibition fails to prohibit =? We think
not.
We have had grand iuries and petit
juries, sworn officials and individuals,
the classes and the masses. each and
all, sprinkIed over with the venom of
abuse, because they refused to be
blinded to the facts Of the case, or
dared to deny the efficacy of the law.
And yet, the situation remains I'M
changed. 1850 a -
Suppose some OF. our-4sfethfeIf ia he
a differentwAstft hids' in sdeallHg u til
the suhjseE1 5y0afd 1t nbtYt.estnore
reasonahle. hen one sees slils fsllow
man stdiiding on The brink VI q ptecie
pice, to ehdeaEorl 70, lead MIN away
from his danger, instead OF first try.
ing to fill up the hole, and railing at
nature for creating the cavity:
We may argue that the traffic in
LIQUOR makes drunkards, but We can
not truthfully draw the conclusion
that men who drink liquor must nee
cessarily become drunkards. A man
who has a leak in the roof of his
house very properly puts on patch
to keep out the wet it is far more
sensible plan than to borrow Mrs.
Partington's broom and frantically
try to sweep the clouds from the sky.
So too, when temptation to drink
comes upon us, it is wiser to keep the
lips closed, than to attempt to break
up the traffic. The world will yet find
it is easier to resist temptation, than
it is to destroy the tempter.