The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1903-01-01

inference, that the Democratic party
was the temperance party, by quoting
former Republican member OF the
legislature as stating that while at Au-
gusta he had found that his party was
the rum party. Bro. Wadsworth want
ed no change, and should vote for none.
Bro. VIM. H. Moody of Liberty made
the pertinent point that the whole line
of debate seemed to have been on the
assumption that the repeal of the pro-
hibitory clause in the constitution would
give us license law. This was not
true; the repeal of that clause would
not alter the law as it now stands. but
only give our legislature the right to
alter it, if they saw fit, outside OF pro-
hibitory lines, which they might never
do; hence the debate had been nearly
altogether outside the lines of the sub
any change in our law new law would
have to be enacted, and the present one
repealed. Entire prohibition never had
been attained in Maine, and in his judg-
ment never would be until the people
of the State should become united upon
the subject. Even in Portland, where
Sheriff Pearson had thrown his life away
in order to accomplish it, entire success
was not reached as he knew by person.
al observation. Prohibition, or some
other mode of restraint, was much to
be desired, but at this time he thought
the people of Maine were not ready to
change their present method.
Sister Howes of Liberty was called
upon and said that it was useless for
women to talk upon;the subject, as they
had no power to back it up, but give
them suffrage and they would soon set
tie the matter.
Sister Sukeforth of Liberty said the
only good that she could see that might
result from resubmission would be to
stir the matter up and make the people
take new interest in the subject.
In the foregoing debate think near
lv every shade of opinion is, more or
less. represented as held by people who
have supported and will support, tenn,
perance laws, and not greatly out OF
proportion in numbers Admitting TINS
to be true. | think that | am JUSTIFIED
in arriving at the following specific
Conclusions:
1st Few or none are fully satisfied
with the law as it stands. Some are
dissatisfied with the law itself; others
with its execution.
2nd. Many will sustain the law, but
will not aid in its execution.
| 3rd. Very few believe that prohl-
bition will ever become thoroughly
effective.
4th. Nearly all seem to think the
| only alternative to prohibition Is high
| license and local option, and in forming
their minds in regard to resubmisslon
| they are only choosing between these
| two methods.
AS all effects have a cause, so must
there be a cause or reasons, for this
state or condition of mems minds bear
| ing upon this subject. Let US see II we
can trace them.
| Crimes are of various kinds. Some,
| like murder, arson, robbery, etc, are SO
generally recognized as unquallhed
| wrongs against the community that
| the perpetrators are hunted down and
consigned to punishment by the com
| nJunity at large. Other crimes, like
marital infdelity, although universally
| held as a crime Of high order, and to
my mind causing as many broken homes
and hearts, if not so many broken heads,
as excessive use of Intoxicating drinks,
are seldom prosecuted, and the public
takes no thought of special means to
hunt them down.
Still other crimes are only made
crimes by the arbitrary action of law,
the act denominated as a crime in itself
being no wrong. Such are some OF our
fish and game laWs-one day it is legal
and right to kill game, the next day 1T
is crime. 1t is a meritorlous business
to take and sell Holsters up to certain
length but to sell one short OF the
given length becomes a crime. The
prohibitory law must be classed with
these latter ones, as the law Itself rec
ogniZes the right of sale i'll certain con-
ditions, SO that the conditions of sale
make the crime, and not the sale ITSELF
In most laws below murder there is
a maximum and minimum penalty at
tached, between which the magistrate
has discretion accorded to him, to lit
the penalty according to the gravity or
turpitude of the wrong in each lndl-
vidual case: but in this law no discre-
ton is allowed, hence the same penalty
is demanded where no moral wrong IS
done, as it does where the greatest tur-
pitude that this class of crimes permits
of has been shown.
This is so manifestly unjust, that it
repels activity in the execution of the
law. Gibbon, in his "Decline and Fall
of the Roman Empire" in commenting
on some of the laws promulgated by the
Emperor Constantine, remarks; but
whenever the offence inspires less hor
ror than the punishment, the rigor OF
the law is obliged to give way to the
common feelings of mankind And
here let me say, where the penalty is a
greater injustice than the act for which
it is inflicted, men can never be united
in its execution. Whenever each Of
fence can be judged by itself, and pro-
portionate penalties melted out accord
ing to the actual wrong done. then
there may be a hope, but not otherwise.
| hear in reply, and with reason, that
this would destoy all effectiveness OF
the law, but when we have to admit that
evil must be done that good may result
we at least ought to strive to find
road where the good might be attained
without the evil; where penalties, un-
like the rain, fall not on the just and
unjust alike.
Contingent with this injustice comes
the fact that many, not to say most of
the people advocating temperance laws,
at times need. or think they need, spirit
uous liquor for some legitimate use,
and it is difficult for them to believe
that the person that furnishes it to
! them commits a crime.
In my judgment this underlying
quality of injustice in the law is the
fundamental cause of the hesitation of
oil; Ifc II oil