Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1901-04-04
PROHIBITION OR
LOCAL OPTION?
Continued from Sd page).

il as the Free ITess ventures W hopS'
they do not sneak out of sight into
some cellar or dark closet to get
their Triple" they do get it in some
way. And they do go underground for
il as well. But, setting that aside, II
Is a fact open and notorious, that the
state is largely supplied with liquor
nv outside liquor houses through the
mail order trade And it is a fact,
equally notorious, that young men
club together and send for this liquor
and divide II among their number and
that. having it in such quantities, they
are prone to drink it to excess. The
young man at an open bar on a public
street would find it difficult to buy
enough to become intoxicated, even
if he were foolish enough to brave
public contempt by so doing. But in
| secret be may consume his liquor in
such quantities as he pleases and snap
his fingers at the law. The question
is. which is the more dangerous temp
tation for the young man, seeing that
he will have liquor anyway, the open
bar on the pubnc street, or the bottle
in his bedroom or in cellar?
5. True, we shall not escape hypo-
crisy under a license law, but we are
not likely to have so much of 1t under
such a law as we have under the pres
ent law When there is no occasion
for a man TO play the hypocrite about
the liquor question, he is not likely to
do so. Bue when a law like the pres
ent law breeds it by wholesale, when
Legislators drink one way and vote
another, when the officers of the courts
and of the law are called upon TO pun
ish men for the same thing they do
themselves. when men will misrepre
sent their own convictions for the sake
of gaining a political office, and when
the public conscience is generally sub
verted by a law, there is something
wrong with that law.
6. In this article the Free Press
practically admits that the prohibitory
law is designed in the interest of the
moderate drinker who has money
enough to pay an extra price for his
liquor. II says
THE prohibitory law does not at
tempt to enforce total abstinence. IL
says nothing about drinking or abb
staining from drink. What il forbids
is the traffic in intoXicants within this
state, or rather it restricts the lawful
traffic in this state to a single agency
In each town, authorized to sell for
specified purposes. The makers of the
law realized that an appetite as power !
full as that for alcoholic drinks could |
not be extinguished by any statute:
nor did they undertake TO provide |
what a mans private habits should be, |
as long as they do not interfere with |
the peace and good order of society. |
Our law makes intoXication an offense. |
So do the laws of many states which |
have no prohibitory law Total alb
stinence must from the nature of the |
case as general thing be secured |
mainly through moral suasion law |
may assist toward this end by remov
ing temptation from the drinker. |
This the law attempts to do and with
fair success"
So that ii comes down to the bald |
fact that every person may drink II
he wants to, but only those people |
may purchase liquor who can afford |
TO send out of the state for it or who |
will tell lie for the sake ofgetting |
il at the town agency. What does this |
amount to but the most pernicious OF |
class legislation? A law that INDUCES |
a few in their appetite and practically |
debars the many Are not these very |
men who can get liquor under the pro-
hibitory law among its most ardent |
supporters? What shall be said of the |
poorer man. then, who must content |
himself with his occasional nickel or |
dimes worth If he encourages other |
men to violate the law and sell it to |
him? Much might be written about |
the financial aspect of this PROPOSE |
ton, of its effect upon the material |
welfare of the state, how thousands of |
dollars are sent out of the state an
nually for liquor and how prohibition |
in Vermont is a source of financial |
revenue to everybody except Vermont |
ers, but space will not permit at this |
time. II is enough to know that the |
prohibitory law is designed. not to |
interfere with personal habits, but to |
remove temptation" from the man |
who is too poor to send out of the |
state for his liquor. Moral suasion" |
for the man who can afford to buy
liquor in quantities and keep it in his |
house; prohibition" for the man who |
cannot!
Z. In the discussion of this article |
the Free Press brings up again the |
old argument that because the OBJ |
servance of the seventh and eighth |
commandments is not perfectly enforc- |
ed, should We cease attempting to en- |
force it2 This is fully answered in the |
treatment of the first article. The
conditions are not analogous. The |
Free Press says, The law is so far
enforced that no open bars are to |
found in the state of Vermont" This
statement probably could be fatty
contradicted, but for obvious reasons
probably will not be. But. no matter.
suppose there are no open bars in
the state of Vermont Does that sig
nifty that there is no drinking? If we
put away all open and notorious evi-
dences OF our vices, are we reformed
If We continue them in secret. or are
We like unto the ostrich that hides
her head in the sand and fancies that
she cannot be seen? The question