Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1903-01-22

the South Carolina ulspthsdiy ia"'
but understand them to provide 1or
the sale OF liquor by public officials
only. thus eliminating the element OF
creed and introducing the element OF
watcbtulness and restraint. Ii some
thing besides prohibition must De
tried. why not try something IKE
this III lived in Vermont | should
vote against the license law in order
to get an opportunity either to strip
the present law OF its barnacles or TO
enact wise measure of public control.
AT a meeting of the Committee of
Fifteen. held at Burlington Monday,
reports were made showing very
gratifying progress in the campaign
against the liquor act. Most OF the
counties are already thoroughly or
ganized and actively at work. The
committee has forwarded a petition
to Gov. Mccullough asking that in
the event ola 'No" vote the governor
appoint a committee of twenty-five
leading citizens to make a careful
study of all forms of liquor legislation
and to report before the next session
of the legislature. The committee
thoroughly appreciates that the
present law is not at all satisfactory,
and instead of limiting its efforts
merely to negative of the proposed
new law, takes the commendable
step of trying to improve conditions.
It thereby acknowledges that some
radical changes must be made, but
looks toward a different remedy than
the one proposed at this time.
License advocates, in their desper-
ate efforts to stem the tide that is run
ming against their saloon measure, are
seeking to shit the argument to the
proposition that their bill does not
legalize the saloon, but simply allows
each town to say for Itself whether it
will have the saloon or not. 1t is
maintained that each town is the
proper Judge of its own condition, and
should be left to decide the saloon
question itself This theory is plau-
sible, on its face, and really has some
merit, as we shall try to show, but
when closely Analysed is not con-
vincing. If the saloon were an insti-
tuition whose standing was unques-
toned, then we could quite agree to
the proposition that each town should
decide whether it wanted one or not.
If it were like bank, or an agricul-
tural fair, or anything else of per-
fectly innocent nature, it would be
well to let each community decide for
itself. But if, on the other hand, as a
great many believe, the saloon is a
menace and an injury, and under any
condition would do evil, instead of
good, it is not true that each town
should be left to invite it in, if bare
majority OF It's voters so decide. We
do not allow towns to determine for
themselves whether they will permit
the establishment of gambling houses
we declare, as a state, that
they shall not exist, and the fact that
the majority of voters in one or more
communities might favor them does
not give warrant to the assumption
that therefore they should have them.
Local option is better than license,
pure and simple, and why? Because
it gives towns chance to Danish the
saloon, not because it gives them a
chance to establish it. 1t is also a
method by which the sentiment Of a
community is recorded, and serves a
good purpose in that way. But if a
voters honest judgment is that a
licensed saloon is not a proper insti-
tuition for any community, he is justi-
fed in voting against this act, without
examining his mental attitude further,
for this bill has within it the possibil.
ity of the licensed saloon.
n