The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1903-11-12
DRUNKENNESS AND HONE.

For some reason tls impression ls
common tlat in his sEr house a lau
has d righ. % be ls drunk s te
preas-s
Every man is a king .a bis oa4 cas-.
re a1t .t De- chooses @. De drum. '
.s lolotys aas.res ... MS ,--
So most people think
But the ..up.a..1.t .. ..y -.a-..s
who aye in the habit OF 5n!oy.r- .n
s,..ls.on The comfort .hst a BOTH.
grants u.s. shaken by decision given
by the FUN bench " 'as Na leHu -,s
supreme court
A woman drunk Ju: IlIaly sls.Ius
on a couch az her haue va. complain.
yi against. arrested aa9 convicted %
being drunk The court instructed
the jury that "!t taag ".r. sausf..
upon al. the evidence. tair t.e Ie.aI-
au, aaea found .n She room. was
.uus uy tho yoluutl u-. OF .rt9a
.ea-Ine liquor she m.e.t I. a.m..-..
g..ar rho complaint
Appeal was taken 20 ta. suY.....
court and .1 the slp..m. count tlt
both sustained the ,.L...YI I.s
aa.a made puulshlao Uy tIe .l...
-aahGset's statutes. according 20 the
Interpretation OF the supreme ccu..
g. 'Irllcuuess by the voluntary use
O., intoxicating liquor oal be place.
where the oneuse i- oJmmittaI
whether public or private is not m
element 20 Dc consid-. u letermu-
Ing whether an accuf.. person is gI.l.
e. under the law"
~ In Boston. at least. tais decision
must cause public alar,n ia hat aus.
tere town the police have ocen ia
structcl by the chair e. ~ Of the police
board that man % drank wjth.I
the view Of the statute. If the smell
o' liquor can be detected on his breath
The Boston police is n1r q smelling
committee. with authority % follow a
TO- liquor can be detected on his breath
wake him from his s'1ep if mis- sleep
has been induced by booze am carry
him Of to the station
And why not?
II II is a crime 10 get drunk. why
is IL not as much a crime in o1r
place as another?
Who would think of doeming mw
der for in stance any the less murd
and any the less punishable, becau
committed in the privacy Of a man
home, and the members Of his own
family the only victims?
Drunkenness is differ-at from mu.-
der of course. But there is a de-
cidcd connection between them
Scarcely a single days news fails 10
report the murder Of innocent mem
bers Of his family by some man who
asserted his right" to Doe drunk in
his own house.
Almost every day we read of mu.
Iorors throwing themselves on the
mercy of the court with one plea:
i was drunk and didn't know what
was ing"
These countless fellows VINO have
murdered while drunk. and who ought
20 know, don't tell us there is no CON
nection between drunkenness and
murder-do they?
No no In their pleas the counec-
tion is direct. definite and irresistible
Then shall this condition of befud-
died and inhamed mind. which in
duces tour-hfths of all murders, be
tolerated in the homes?
Haven't the wives and children and
aged parents as much right to protec-
tion as has the public on the streets
Not every drunk ends in murder,
OF course not.
Not every lighted match applied to
building burns it. But neverthc-
less. the law will not permit any maa
to apply lighted matches to his own
home.
There's a great difference in men.
Eut in tho long run there isn't much
difference in booze and what it does
O. them Kansas City World.