The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-02-22
Prohibition in Vermont.
b. +. WILLIAMS,
Harrellsville. N. c.

To the Editor: I read in last Sundays
issue of your paper AN argument against
the London Bill" by Mr.. J. p. Stedman,
in which he says: Vermont over fifty
wears ago. became a prohibition State,
and after so long a trial, the people
found the law would not work, so WITHIN
the past few weeks at q general cleo
ton, they have voted to try local option"
Then he asks, What does this mean?
Does it not mean that the people of Yer
mont have learned by experience
Being a native of the Green Mountain
State. where I am stifl property owner
and Taxpayer think I can throw some
light on the recent general election re
ferred to by Mr.. Stedman. In the first
place, the people did not find that the
law would, not work, as stated. While it
is true that whiskey in some instances
was struggled into the towns from other
States, and was sold it is also true that
when a man was found intoxicated he
was locked up till he would tell where
he got his whiskey, and the one who sold
it, Or gave it to him was heavily fined
for the first two offences, and sent to
the work-house for the following Of
fences. This. of course, displeased those
to make money by selling, and it pleased
the politicians who wanted to make po
litical canital.
Mr.. Clement was nominated by inc
whiskey party for Governor, but there be-
ing three candidates in the field, no one
received a majority, and so the election
OF q Governor fell to- the Legislature who
elected General Mccullough 1.-THE Prohibi-
40
convened, in order to have the liquor
question settled, a bill was passed re-
ferring the matter to the people, and at
the recent election mentioned By M.
Stedman, local option secured victory
of only 1000 majority, while the total
vote fell off 10000 from that of the Sep
TENDER election.
In 1852 the majority for prohibition at
the referendum was LII, a change OF
only 1000 votes in fifty years with an
increase of 10000 foreign population ia
vorable to the whiskey traffic. When
this is taken into consideration, together
with the fact that the majority for local
option was secured in the large towns,
where this foreign element was largely
in evidence the result cannot be claimed
as a change of sentiment on the temper
ance question on the part of native Yer
monters but must be attributed to the
increase of foreign population. The town
of Barre. VT. e. g., the inhabitants of
which is con'Dosed almost entirely Of
Italians who have located there to work
in the granite quarries, gave $50 majority
fol local option, out of vote of LAYS.
Those who favored prohibition were over
confident, and stayed at home; and the
result was a victory for the whiskey ele-
ment.
1t has been said that prohibition does
not prohibit" neither does law against
crime prohibit the frequent occurrence of
de stardly crimes. Is that any reason
why we should license murder and rob-
berry, and shall we license the sale Of
whiskey and make it appear that it is
honorable and justifiable to ruin homes
and damn mems souls by giving such
things the approval and sanction of the
State law
The laws prohibiting murder and steal
ing do not prevent both these crimes be-
ing committed. and the Legislature of
abolishing capital punishment. but who
would presume that it would sanction
the license of burglary and highway rob-
berry because the law did not always
prevent it and thus make crime an hon
orable occupation as license does the
manufacture and sale of intoxicating Ii
Cuors.
GILMORE WARD BRYANT.
Durham, ~ c.. Feb. 16. 1903.