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

When it was enacted many of the
larger towns were calling for the
change. as much as the smaller vii
lagos. The representative from Burling-
ton when the law was enacted, the late
Henry p. Hiekok, was a staunch ad
yocate and supporter of the prohibitoTy
law. The majority of the senators and
representatives from Burlington have
sustained the law against the success
siye attempts 10 repeal IL; and the
same has been true of a majority of
the representative from the larger
towns during the period of the exist
ing law. The indications are that a
majority of the population of Vermont
prefer the law, today. TO any other
liquor law that they know OF; and that
If a vote could be taken on the simple
issue between license and prohibition
to which We should not object
the result would show that while per
haps half a dozen of the cities might
favor a change, by larger or smaller
majorities, no classification of the
smaller towns and cities, as against
the larger, would be found possible
So much for the specific objections
set forth by Bishop Hall. The prac.
tical question is. as to what is the
best mode of restricting a traffic, the
need of restricting which is recog-
nized by all civilized nations. We do
not believe that prohibition would be
the best method in all communities.
For a community like Vermont 1t is
fairly good method. If better can
be devised We shall be glad to wei.
come It. II would not. as we think, be
better to go back half a century TO
a license system. We had previous to
1852. such a system, not unlike, in
some of its features, the system con
templated by the local option OF the
last session. The county judges con
stituted the licensing board, and gave
not a great many licenses in proper
ton to population. The hotels had
open bars. and the wholesale as well
as retail traffic was permitted. The
amount of drunkenness, pauperism,
and crime resulting from strong drink
was much greater in proportion 70 pop
ulation then, than it has been under
our prohibitory law. Bishop Hall
alludes TO election days in Burlington.
In those days elections were carried
not only BY the number Of voters who
could be Influenced by treating to
drinks but by the number who could
be made so drunk that they could not
20 TO the polls. This was long be
for Bishop Hall came TO America, and
he had no opportunity to see the
change for the better made by the pro
hibitory law: but many Of our readers
win distinctly recall il. The law was
originally approved by but a small
majority Of the voters of Vermont upon
the popular vote. many strong friends
of temperance doubling how it would
work. In practice it so demonstrated
its efficiency, in the lessening OF
drunkenness, misery, rioting. pauper
ism. and crime. that opposition TO II
was almost wholly sileneed; and nc
serious attempt to return to license
system stood the faintest show of sue
cess for forty years. II does not stand
much chance now.
We submit that Bishop Hall has mol
made out case against the Vermont
law. But it is not enough TO show It's
defects. 1t must be shown that the
proposed substitute for it will not be
open 10 like objections in equal de
gree. Till this is done the people oil
Vermont will not be likely to change
their law. even under the leadership
of one as sincere and worthy as the
| bishop of Vermont.