Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1902-05-05
THE HERALD'S IDEA.

Some of the prohibition newspapers
of the state are beginning to bring out
some of the old time pleas for prohi-
bition. We reprint in another column
an article from the ORLEANS COUNTY
MONITOR on what it calls 1.-THE True
Issue" 1t is air sample, ignoring
the circumstances that exist and
assuming that they are as the
MONITOR would like to imagine them
that the so-called prohibitory
law does prohibit. The MONITOR
says: ''The question is not whether
there would be more or less drinking
places under license than prohibition
for under the latter there need be,
none." If there "need be none" why
are there so many? 1t is an undeni-
able fact that there are hosts of them.
If 30 years has not been sufficient to
close up the saloons with law under
which there "need be none" how long
will it take? Why are they not closed
up? The MONITOR is on the right
track when it says: "No law, not
even the law against arson, will ex-
ecute itself" In other words. the law
must have the sympathy of the people
if it is to be enforced. The MONITOR
assumes that prohibitory law can
the revelations of 30 years? Why not
a nit that the law has been failure?
Why not let each town decide the
matter for itself? The towns where
public sentiment is against the sale of
liquors could vote no license and the
towns where opinion is such that
liquor selling in defiance of the So
called prohibitory law is allowed by
public consent could place the traffic
where it could be controlled by rigid
regulations, instead of allowing it to
go on as now under little or no re-
straint. t.-Rutland Herald.
The MONITOR does not "imagine''
that the prohibitory law can stop the
use of liquors in this state but it does
believe that under it there is much
less intemperance than there would
be under any local option or Ii
cense measure. The main point
which the Herald and other license
advocates make against the present
law is thatit does not entirely prohibit,
but none of them have been able to
point to a single law which does en-
tirely prohibit. The prohibitorY law
is doing all that any law can do. That
the law is being broken to a certain
extent is true, but the same parties
who are now breaking it would break
license law if it was necessary for
them to do SO in order to obtain drink.
In addition to these there would be
many others who would become
habitual users of intoxicants if saloons
were opened where they could be
patroniZed. The claim that the Herald
makes that by voting license or no Ii
cense the people of each town could
determine for themselves the condi-
tions which should exist in their town
would not hold true in case local op-
tion law should be enacted, as it would
then be necessary for but few towns
in each county to vote for license for
the effect to be felt in every town.
The plan which the Herald advocates
would give the few who might not
drink to excess a chance to exercise
what they claim to be their "right" to
drink intoxicating liquors in the sight
of the public and it would also place
it within the power of far greater
number who are now expending but
small amount of their earnings for
drink, to satiate their appetite daily,
and the money which is now being
used in providing good homes for
their families would then 60 into the
we'll filed Golfers of the saloon
keepers.