Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1902-05-23
Not a Back Number.

The discussion of the prohibitory
law by its opponents proceeds largely
upon the assumption that prohibition
is not in accordance with modern ways
and modern ideas-that it is a back
number--that it is not the method
which modern, "up-to-date" commu-
mites use to control the liquor traffic.
Upon this point, Harper's Weekly
which is a paper of general news and
literature. and neither an advocate
nor an opponent of prohibition, has re-
Gently published an article giving some
interesting facts on this subject.
| Promising that every state and every
civilized community possesses and ex-
ercises the right of controlling the
traffic in intoxicating liquors, the Har-
| per's Weekly article goes on to say:
'If we take prohibition in its most lib
cral Interpretation. we find that nearly
| half the population of the United States is
| living under the local-option or state pro-
hibition laws regarding the sale of in
toxicating drinks. In studying the fig
ures given by the prohibition enthusiasts
! acted prohibition or local-option laws
| which cover every county and town.
| These five states, which have been the
| pioneers in this movement. are Maine.
| New Hampshire, Vermont. Kansas, and
North Dakota. But other states are
| nearly as generally governed by the same
| prohibitory laws. the few exceptions hard
| " being sufficient to remove them from
! the same class. The whole of Georgia
| is under state prohibition or local-opton
! laws, with the exception of four cities
| South Dakota, with the exception of a
| few cities and towns; South Carolina,
| with the exception of ten cities: and
| Iowa, with the exception of twenty-five
! cities. In New York state we have some
! 700 cities and towns that have thus drawn
! the strict line of abolshing the sale of
! spirituous drink. and in Massachusetts.
| out Of 353 towns and cities, 263 have fallen
| in line. Illinois has to her credit $50
] cities and towns enjoying local-option
laws; Ohio. 500; Michigan, 400: Wisconsin.
| 800; Nebra ska. 80; Minnesota. 400; New
Jersey, 200. California, 175.
"All the other states have moved In line
| 10 more or less extent. many of them
adopting local prohibition laws according
| to counties rather than by towns or cities.
! In Alabama 50 out of 65 counties are re-
/ ported to be under prohibition laws; in
! Arkansas, - out Of - counties: in Flor
| ida. 81 out Of As counties; in Kentucky, 90
out of ll9; in Louisiana. % out of 80 coun-
| ties; In Maryland. l. out of "A counties: in
| Mississippi, Il out OF 75 counties; in
| Missouri 81 out of lis counties; in North
! Carolina 60 out of o. counties: in Penn
| sylvania. 6o cities and towns and 20 coun-
| ties; in Tennessee, 20 out of 96 counties: in
| Texas. 10 out of 2i6 counties: in Virginia.
- out OF 1O6 counties: in West Virginia, a.
out of "a counties; and in Washington, &C
! cities and towns. Little Delaware has
half the state under prohibition. and little
Rhode Island % of its cities and towns
| In these numerous cities. towns and
counties 1t is estimated that there is a
total population of about 80. 600. 900 people
These figures do not indicate that
prohibition as a principle is a thing OF
the past. or that vermont is pehind
the times in using this way to control
the liquor evil. Her record in this
respect is nothing for any young man
to be ashamed of. We have known
that prohibition was coming to be
more and more the rule in the South
ern states, but it is surprise to know
that il prevails in one form or another
to so large an extent over the Middle
and Western states. 1t is the method
adopted, as here appears, either by
prohibitory laws direct, or by enforc
ing the prohibitory features of loca
option laws, to control the liquor
traffic as affecting nearly one-half the
whole population of the country.