The united opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1881-1970, 1903-01-02

told; but the number of those who
are willing to see the prohibitory
law changed and yet unwilling to
see the saloon with all its evils made
the master of local and State poll
tics is large enough to hold the bal
ance Of power in the coming contest.
| There is also a third class, whose
numbers are not yet determined;
those who believe in license law,
but are dissatisfied with specific
features of the proposed one, and
who may choose to see this defeated
in February in the hope of getting
better license law passed later.
During the agitation of the last
few months, it has been assumed by
many of the anti-prohibitory news
papers that if once this issue could
come to a popular vote any license
law would imm ediately receive an
overwhelming vote. If such vote
| had been taken last September,
when the Clement movement was at
its full force and the horrors of pro-
hibition had been so wildly set
forth, with no special critical
thought given to the actual features
of a license bill, that would nave
been the probable result; but today
no one feels so confident. The h1gh
license tide which rose so suddenly
last spring has certainly reached its
height, and some careful political
observers do not hesitate to declare
that it is now ebbing. Certain it is
that the definite idea of having a sa- !
loon enter the block where one is DO
ing business is repugnant to bust
ness men in our large centres; ana
some who have been loudest in their
clamor against the prohibitory law
are now expressing themselves very
cautiously concerning the measure.
There is going to be great deal OF
quiet study of the details of this new
measure, which was rushed through
the Legislature with practically no
thought or discussion after it left
the committee room. Some of those
features are already seen to be open
to grave fears, even on the part of
some who had large share in tram
ing the bill.
The division of license fees and
fines, half and half between the To-
cality and the State, is the fairest
division feasible, but some will OPP
pose the bill because it gives any
thing to the State and others be-
cause it does not give all to the
State, and thus remove the pressure
of municipal avarice as favoring the
introduction of saloons. The most
unpopular feature of the law is
likely to be that which provides for
the appointment of the local liquor
commissioners by the selectmen OF
a town or by the alderman and may
or of city for terms of six years
each, one going out of office every
two years. This means that any
two men on board of selectmen or
a mayor and three out of board of
six aldermen can absolutely control
the giving of all licenses for four
years to come by the first appoint
ments of commissioners, who are
practically fixtures, unremovable for
malfeasance in office. This means
that local politics will be dominated
simply and solely by the struggle
after saloon licenses in many places;
and it also affords reason to fear
that if such a law once goes into
effect the saloon element will so
completely control county politics as
to make it difficult if not impossible
for a Senate to be elected which
will allow any changes in the law
except by the permission of the
rum sellers.