Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1900-04-20


If a man, as the Judiciary in nearly every
State has decided, has no inherent or moral,
or vested or natural right to sell into XiCating
liquors, then the only right that he can have
10 such limited and restrained legal right as
he may be given by some license law. In
that view then IL can readily be seen that the
liquor sellers are in favor of any kind OF
license law, becau SO q license law gives them
protection to some extent. or course they
are In favor of IL; license law gives them the
protection they can get In no other way, and
repeal Of the local option law, whether low
or high, throws around that business, which
the highest courts Of the land have plainly
declared dangerous to society, the protection
which will foster and increase the danger.
A leading independent newspaper Of an ad-
joining State says, "'ihe saloon is a vicious
dangerous plague on our civilization, and
one OF the most prominent partisan organs ia
u neighboring city declared the saloon to be
"a universal public enemy" And yet some
of our people say we should foster and pro-
tecI II by legalizing 1t 10 a license law Let
those OF our citizens who thus believe bear IN
mind that the purpose of u license system Is
not to injure or restrict the bust ness licensed
but TO promote it. The conclusion then must
be inevitable that every citizen who favors
licensing the saloon must be in favor OF pro-
mOtlnK tne bhlOOu Dublutbb. We MI huOW
that under the license system the saloons have
prospered 1t is their life, they thrive under
it they beg for license they bride for IT.
cense, it is they who are at the back of any
pressure for license. Who spent money at An
napolis aud paid expenses OF delegations TO
the Legislature al the late session. The
liquor men did II who wanted u license bill
passed. No voluntary delegations of citi-
| gems went there representing important COM
| munities urging that the interests OF their
nelghbOrs and the prosperity OF their dis
| tricts felt the great aud pressing need for the
passage Of license law. venture to assert
| that the only citizens who went there were
the paid attorneys of the liquor men and
| few citizens of our county whose expenses
were also paid by the liquor men.
Mr.. Lamar goes on TO stale some "iacts'
| In regard TO the operation OF the local option
law But it is not a fact when he states that
the law is to blame because there are or have
been seventy i've to one hundred places In
the county where liquors are sold. He could
justly charge recreAnt and uniaithful officials
| with the blame He could also Justly charge
these officials with the useless expense and
extravagant and abortive efforts TO enforce
the law. But be cannot fairly charge the law
itself with 1t. No one knows this better than
he does. We are expecting better things of the
new officials, and the people Of the county
not only expect them, but as is our right in
sist on having them. We do not believe there
will be any more summonsing Of fifty wit
nesses 10 an Insignificant case that never gets
To trial, and these witnesses drawing their
per diem for three days These are the things
that have made the local option law and all
law a farce In this county and have piled up
unnecessary expense. But the law should not
be blamed for it, il Is careless administration
of law that has caused il. The last term OF
court makes different showing, as follows:
Total fines imposed, 81, 800. Total expense
including g. and jury, petit juries, witness
fees and all court expense will not exceed
81, TOO, leaving a surplus Of $500 to the cred
il Of the court. What then becomes OF the
often-heard statement that the local option
cases are burden 10 the taxpayers2 That
statement must be buried in oblivion here
after.
Mr.. Lamar falls into expressions Of exag-
geration and, doubtless without intending,
into mi sleading expressions also, when he
says that taxpayers are put to the expense OF
thousands Of dollars every year in abortive
efforts TO enforce the law, and that the tax
pay ers lose from fifteen TO twenty thousand
dollars every year without deriving benefits
therefrom. Such statements get circulation,
but they are not facts
hVeu unutf HCbnbe bybtem Tue county
would not gain. Mr.. Lamar knows that H.
cense money collected 10 county goes almost
entirely into the State treasury by law. He
may claim that this could be avoided by spe-
ciai provision, but even il II could, (Which !
doubt, the extra police force that would be
required aud the extra law machinery needed
under license system would largely over
balance whatever portion of the license fees
bis bill would put into the county fund. A
foul murder was committed this week at
Cabin John Bridge Who can ever pay for
the sorrow that murder caused And leaving
out the heart broken relatives, calling their
grief nothing, (which some would seem will
ling 10 do in county costs in such matters,)
the cost to the county 10 that one murder, In
mere dollars and cents, will outnumber the
license fee the Cabin John Hotel would pay
three TO one.
When Mr. Lamar states as q fact that q
large number OF our prominent officials bus
mess men, farmers and lab0rng people will
not tell the truth about sales Of liquor. and
when summoned before the grand jury will
perjure themselves, he exposes one Of the
worst evils Of the liquor business, under
whatever phase II ID conducted. heard IL
charged 10 q public address lately ia Rock
vile that the man who sells liquor will lie TO
save himself, and that men who drink II are
accept the statement until Mr.. Lamar gives II
TO US fact that they will not only lie but
perjure themselves. How does Mr.. Lamar
know that as fact If he were summoned
under oath to tell the fact would he give facts
or would he also enter the ranks Of the per-
Iured ones Mr.. Lamar says that II 10 the
fault Of the local option law that q man COM
mits perjury And that therefore the local
option law should be repealed And that the
business for which the men have cammitted
perjury should be licensed so they need not
commit perjury any more That is argume Mt
for you that 10 simply absurd.
He says that more people engage In the
liquor traific under the local option law than
would be possible under any license system.
He does not give this as fact, he could not
do SO, becsuse 1t Is only conjecture AZ to
how many would engage Ia II under license
system. ] will make two statements however
10 answer, one will be a fact and the other
| will be like his, an opinion. IL Ia a fact,
which he loses sight Of that 1t has been the
loose and careless administration Of law that
has allowed the traffic to be carried on In this
county, and not the law itself that has al
lowed Il. The law forbids II, but the executors
Of the law heretofore permitted II. Please
do not continually lose sight Of that fact. -
An d the further fact also that since atten ton
has been vigorously called 10 these things
aud the people have spoken at the polls anc
eIsew here, the number OF places In the cou
ty that have paid the internal revenue tax hai
been reduced from n TO SO, and II SOM
promises that have been made by those Ia tn