The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1901-01-23

articles-after week OF meditation
to subjects of recent discussion in the
JOURNAL, directed for the most part to
ever present question Of the regulation
of the liquor traffic. The contemporary
develops signs of hysteria in his refer
ences to the subject, and in his dis
course there are traces of that inco-
herency which indicate desperation in
the defense of bad cause. He is dis
turbed by the JOURNALS reference to
the Vermont liquor code, commonly
called prohibitory, though it ia nothing
OF the kind, but which in fact provides for
the sale of liquor, under the authority
of the State, for certain purposes COM
monty recognized as legitimate, or
necessary and seasonable. The NeaoS
exclaims
The sale OF liquor in Vermont for
any purpose whatever, as other mer-
chandise is sold, is absolutely pre-
hibited.
That is correct. In few, if any, civ
ilized communities do the laws permit
the sale of liquor "as other merchan-
disc is Sold" Even the proposed Ii
cense law, which was the NeW's "pet"
measure for the regulation of the liquor
traffic, did not provide for the sale of
liquor 'as other merchandise is sold,"
and it is not necessary TO go into dis
Is ha xxybx tha linnnr
traffic is subjected to the checks and
restraints that are not imposed on
trade in general. That is subject of
time worn discussion. Again the
Netos:
The Journal says sit (the law re-
cognizes the legitimacy of the use of
liquors for certain we'll defined pur
poses" Indeed. Who settles the ques-
ton of the Legitimate" use of liquors?
Is that the province of the editor of
the Journal?
The Journal having stated that the
la,o settles the question of the "legiti-
mate" use of liquor, the contemporary
exhibits his utter confusion and de-
moralization on this whole subject by
incoherently demanding if this is "the
province of the editor of the Journal?"
The contemporary should have taken
another week to sober down to cool re-
Election. But he shows CLEAN of lu-
cidity In the next inquiry:
What is the Legitimate" use of any
article, but the use OF it by free citi-
zen in any way he chooses that does
not interfere with the rights OF othersP
There you have it-''in any way he
chooses that does not interfere with the
rights of Others" That's the esse nee
of the whole question of the regulation
of the liquor traffic by law. No such
qualification is made in the use or traffic
in calico, milk, butter, bread, hard
ware, etc., etc. But drunken person
in thousand namable and nameless
ways "interferes with the rights of 9TH
ers," even to the extent of personal in
jury, or violence and death. The man.
fold evils and curses that follow in the
train of the traffic in liquor to admins
ter to an appetite constitute "an inter-
ference with the rights of others that
calls for and justifies its control by ev-
cry possible check and restraint. With
in this limitation, interference with
the rights of Others" the existing
liquor code Of Vermont, as the JOUR-
NAL maintained, does not enter the do
minion of personal rights.
1t hardly seems possible that the
News intends to be taken seriously in
this matter. Its references to the sub
ject abound in freaks OF reason and
nonsense which it would be idle to re-
view in detail. Many of them consti-
tute the stock objections to the present
law. Their worthlessness or invalidity
have been often exposed, and the only
reason why they are repeated is that
the free rum fraternity has nothing
else to put up in support of cause that
has no foundation in reason, morals or
common sense. There are "subterfuge,
lying, deception and perjury under
almost any law of the State, and if
these offences are cause for the repeal
or change of any law the whole code OF
statutes, civil and criminal, relating to
any subject whatever, would be ripped
up and abolished, or modified to make
it easy for those disposed to offend to
offend without fear of discovery and
punishment.
| Gv.Ja