Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1901-04-04


different name for the law might have
obyiated much misunderstanding of its
object and much unfounded denuncia-
ton of it. But that cannot now be
helped. Its title is fixed and cannot
be changed. 1t is true that the law
does not prohibit in the sense Of pre-
venting all traffic in liquor. Neither
does the law against stealing prevent
theft. nor the law against murder pre-
vent murder. This is no argument
against the Vermont law; unless the
one who advocates il Is prepared TO
say that he would repeal all laws that
do not perfectly accomplish their pur'
pose, which would amount to wiping
almost all laws of from the statute
books.
.. Prohibition drives the traffic I'M
derground. This certainly is not an
unmixed evil. To drive the traffic I'M
derground is largely TO remove temp
tation from the men who are fighting
their craving for liquor, and from the
young, who have not yet acquired the
craving. Is II nothing that the man
must hunt for his destroyer, and that
il does not hunt for him? Is not this
enough to eounterbalance the regula-
ton OF the quality OF the liquor sold
IN the saloons? Besides where does
any license law ensure the purity OF
the liquor sold in the saloons and over
the bars? Dispensary laws may ac-
complish something in that direction;
but no license law does. Besides the
unlicensed traffic everywhere accom-
panies the licensed traffic and is no
more easily regulated than the uniaw-
ful traffic under the prohibitory law.
Bishop Hall admits. in his closing
paragraph that the sale of liquor is
practically unrestricted under the Ii
cense laws OF neighboring states.
8. We do not believe that more liz
OF IS bought and used, in any Vermont
community. under the existing law,
than would be bought and used under
q license system. The fact that all ltq-
Tor dealers. outside of the state and in,
are violently opposed 10 the prohibit
tory law is sufficient proof that the re-
verse OF this is true.
4. This objection reads as If Bishop
Hall supposed that the law forbids
drinking. which is not the case. 1t for
bids selling. But If what the bishop
means is that the fact that the selling
is unlawful provokes men. especially
young men, to drink we venture 10
doubt IL. We prefer 10 believe that
most Of our young men, even OF the
number who have formed the taste
for strong drink are not so lost to man
illness that they prefer TO sneak out
of sight into some cellar or dark closet
TO get their Triple. But If No. Is a
valid argument against prohibition II
Is a valid argument against all re-
striction. We must have no Sunday
closing clause, or closing OF saloons
on election days, or at midnight or
other days. and no forbidding of sales
10 drunkards or minors. because these
prohibitions provoke resistance and
stolen drinks are as sweet on Sundays
as on week days.
+. We shall not escape hypocrisy
under a license law.
6. The prohibitory law does not at
tempt to enforce total abstinence. IL
saws nothing about drinking or abb
staining from drink What II forblds
is the traffic in intoxicants within this
state or rather il restricts the iaWtul
traffic in this state to single agency
In each town, authorized to sell Tor
specified purposes. The makers Of the
law realized that an appetite as power
ful 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 40 the laws of many states which
have no prohibitory law. Total ab
q.inancn must from the nature of the
case as a general thing be secured
mainly through moral suasion; law
may assist towards this end by re-
moving temptation from the drinker.
This the law attempts to do and with
fair success.
z When Bishop Hall says that the
existing law is not enforced, ne means
of course not that there is no enforce
nent: but that il is rot perfectly en-
forced. Are the laws designed 10 pro,
mote the observance OF the tth anu
Sth commandments perfectly enforced!
II not should they be wiped on from
the statute book? The law Is SO Tar
enforced that no open bars are 10 ne
found in the state of vermont NO
sign of intoxicating drinks for sale OF
liouor shop window filled with rows
of whiskev bottles tempts the passer-
nv The traffice is put under the pan
of lawlessness. and there is no ques-
ton but that it operates as an import
ant and beneficial restriction OF the
traffic. The liquor dealers and the
saloon keepers fight a prohibitory law
because they recog7 ize no moral
utilization to obey it, They also nght
restrictions. where restrictive laws
exist You cannot persuade them, OF
their customers. that for instance, II
is right to sell huuor up to twelNe
o'clock on Saturday night and a SIN
to sell II FIVE minutes later. As we
have said. the restrictions OF every
stringent license law are eonsta'uy
violated. and as we believe as gem
e~allv violated as are the provisions
of a prohibitory law. Shall there, there,
fore be no restricting Of the franc.
q Bishop Hall Is mistaken. ouI
law was no attempt of the country
folk TO legislate for the larger toWns'