Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1904-04-08
COMMUNICATIONS.
The Yes and No Vote Last Year
and This.

$500 50 AFtN
fuenee is too strong in the southwestern
corner. A license commissioner in
Montpelier has resigned because the
people were not active
enough in the enforcement of the new
law. We are of the opinion that H.
censees promised by their mouthpieees
to fully enforce the law; temperance
people were not really expected to b.
come iuformers; the liquor sellers hold.
ing high priced licenses were to make
the complaints and furnish the proof to
convict those who became willful Law
breakers. The friends of prohibition
were the only ones who attempted to
enforce the old law, aud many obstacles
were being continually thrown in their
way. Why have not the friends of the
new law seen to it that it was so en-
forced as to commend it to thinking
business men? Where are the instan.
ces OF friends of the old law throwing
obstacles in the way of the proper en-
forcement of the new law? They can
not be blamed for being quiet lockers on
in face of the promise that the law
would find the elements of enforcement
in the interests of its friends because
largely of the necessity for self defence.
Some state papers admit seeming de-
feat in manly fashion, while Others are
shaking pepper boxes to blind the peo-
pie and lessen the effect of the tidal
wave. Last year Brighton gave ma
iority of l35 for license this year no
license had majority of %. This is a
very large percentage of loss and gain,
and we may as well admit the truth
first as last, or whistle to keep our cour.
age up as some of the state papers seem
to be doing. Men voted last year for
license, being possessed of the honest
belief that it would be good thing for
business that the law would in the
hands of its friends be enforced better
than the old was wont to be- that the
evil of drunkenness would become less
on our streets. The results leads me to
conclude that business men learned that
high license did not operate to boom
their business, but rather substracted
from their tills. There has been as
much and probably more intoxicatior
than before the law has not enforced
itself and the effect upon the moral life
of the comm unity has been such as tC
cause great change in public senti
ment. Probably the business end O
the question cut the larger figure in thu
change of policy. What is true o
Brighton is undoubtedly true of tn,
other towns in the state. Business mel
have found it IA losing game. The sa
loon has proved to he bank hard t.
break by playing the usual game. Tn
der local option these business men hav,
taken the first opportunity to close thu
saloon, or so cut down the majority of
year ago as to evidence the unsatisfac
tory results of high license. This az
plies also to the cities and large town
which continue the saloon but b.
largely decreased maiorities. Why doe
not The Messenger explain the charg
in the vote of st. Adams instead O
talking about the change in Middlebur
accounting for it by some local persona
disaffection Why does not the Rutlan,
Herald explain the change in that cit
, instead of giving us an essay on the &C
vantages of local option? Why doe
not The Opinion tell us what has hap
pened at Hotel Low in Bradford to OF
casion her citizens to change from Ye
: to No? Why do not The Clipper an
The Argus give us the true reasons fo
the large decrease in the license vote i
Burlington and Montpelier? Why di
Brighton go dry and st. Johnsbur
largely increase her No vote? All ad
NIT great change but few openly an
honestly give the reason for it. Bus
ness is business and the business mel
have done it. Many of them voted Ye
one year ago, honestly believing it was
wise thing to do, but the goods then s
extensively advertised have been foun,
to be of poor quality, and they want n
more of the same kind. This is a
there is to it, and why not admit it.
A PARENT.