St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1901-05-22
DIR PROHIBITORY LAW.
A st. JOhnsbury Citizen" Reply to
Bishop HaIEs Letter in the BUR-
IingtOn Free Press in Favor
of ITS Repeal.

Editor CALIFORNIAN
That determined effort is being made
by those who desire the repeal OF the
present prohibitory law OF the state o
Vermont to so change public sentiment
regarding this question that the next
legislature will favor its repeal, is evil
dent from the class OF men they are call
ing upon to assist them in ridiculing the
present law.
The article which probably has attract
ed the most attention, because of the
writer's prominence in church circles
was written by the Rev. A. c. A. Hall,
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal
Church OF Vermont. But with feeling
that the individual citizen is willing to
give the consideration to this question
which it's importance demands, we de-
sire to examine the reasons given by the
bishop for the repeal of the present law
and substituting therefor license law.
First, he says, Experience has shown
that the law does not prohibit" If he
had said does not wholly prohibit, we
would agree with him, but to say "that
it does not prohibit" is to give conclusive
evidence that his range of experience has
been very narrow, or that he has closed
his eyes to facts which may be gathered
from all over the state. Because he has
had dealings with aggravated cases ofin-
toxication in Burlington" he declares
that he has had ocular demonstration
of the futility of the law" Has the
reverend gentleman ever visited the penal
institutions of the state, and there
brought in contact with the incarcerated
thief, burglar or murderer? Has he
ever sat in court Of Justice, and witness
ed the trial of men for various criminal Of
lenses Has he ever had to deal with
impoverished homes, and ruined families
because of crime? If he has, he then has
had an ocular demon. tration," that no
law wholly prohibits, and to be con-
sistent must declare that he is convinced
of the utter futility of all law"
He next claims chat the present law
drives underground the mischief it seeks
to cure" Admitting this to be partly
true does not that statement annul the
force, if it has any, of his previous state
ment, that the law does not prohibit
For no ore can reasonably claim that
underground the evil will do as much
harm, or make as many sales, or prove
so serious temptation to the young and
temperate, as it would above ground in
gilded saloons and under the glare Of
electric lights. But the difficulty with
this underground business-in the
bishops mind, is, that there "it cannot
be regulated" as it might be above
ground.
This idea of regulating the liquor
traffic is not new with Bishop Hall. But,
what measure OF success has crowned
the attempt to regulate it Compare
social conditions in the states where they
are trying to regulate this evil by law,
with those in states where they seek to
prohibit the evil. The comparison will
not lead any to favor an attempt to reg
ulate it in Vermont.
Where the most stringent laws have
been enacted for it's regulation, the evil
has continued with increasing power,
breaking up homes, running business
making trouble for the state, and hinder.
ing the progress ofrighteousness cutting
down youth, in its vigor, manhood in its
strength, age in it's weakness; making
wives, widows; children, orphans
fathers, 6ends; and all OF them paupers
Will the bishop kindly show us some
place where the liquor traffic is well re
Gulated by license law. But it is not
regulation that the distillers, and the
brewers, and the rum hotel landlords
and the saloon keeper, and all who joir
with the bishop in the cry for regulation
want. Not regulation, but license, they
want; The liberty to continue it's dam
ming work under the sanction and pro
lection of the state.
The third aCcusation AGAINST the law
is, ut causes heavier drinking in clubs
and at homes" 1t can be shown that il