Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1906-08-15
HOW WOULD THEY ENFORCE ?
The Lack OF Honesty and Logic the Present Democratic
Position Regarding the Prohibitory Law

Maine, the Democratic party Is redeemjneS the State
accuses the Republican party Of multiplying the law and in
enforce the law f'' 1880 " ~
Critics who attack administrations have an easy job Of it,
il IS only necessary 10 loaf IN M e,c nd Ia ch,
who doing all the work.
Whatever the Sturgis measure, attempt honestly
law may or may not be- the fact remains that the
a py which the pObtory law could be enforced the
state Kept honest its present slogan
IN te contrary the Democratic party through Sheriff Penne
OF cumberland county declared openly that notification of the
pob'oy law would be its policy That was before the Stu
gs act was thought Of The Democrats called that redeem
ing Cumberland county. 70 follow such declared policy ov
tag 'he Republican party party Of notification delicious
You can ma no serespecng who will take the ground
mat the laws should be enforced while they are laws By
admitting that the prohbory law wasn't enforced in the State
a well as could be-as well as experience has shown
that has been since the Srg law was passed-s not the
proper way to do itlat isn't good wav to secure the
enforcement which they admit should be secured way
s up TO them to propose method this enforce
ment.
The Surgs bill the only method which was suggested
TO the legislature Many members opposed to that bill
still claiming that they desired enforcement If they could sus
gest no better than this what they to complain
that this adoped It certainly necessary that some
means should be devised the enforcement Of the
law, long upon the statute book It was not
question OF the comparative merits of prohibition or license
but it was question OF enforcing the law of our State
Inc Democrats now claim that the law enforced impair
TALLY that IS in parts Of the State there violation
OF the prohbnory law than in Others This criticism to
make and does not from friends OF the law The
TO crtce the enforcement OF the law by saying that
as well enforced in another, critce
commission because they have deputies in one county
and not in another. Pursuing this specols argument if
should be found put deputies into every county
then those critics could by towns following the
same line and cicisng the commission again because deputies
III one town and in another
But however this may Be. thing is certain and that is
that progress has been made in the enforcement the law
this form OF criticism admits for complains axity
IN one place compares with good enforcement existing
other places
The work undertaken BY the Stgis was great
one and must necessarily proceed cautiously step BY step
and the whole trend OF the Democratic argument admits that
so far as has has done WELL Their cry that has
not rushed along headlong speed Then with their usual
fairness, having complained that the commission has not
proceeded fast cnoughhaSnt put deputies III Of our
counties they turn around and persist crcising the Gov
ernor and Council for having spent much money They say
there appropriation of s. 500 and that this has been
largely overrM1 In doing this they carry the
TEN Of telling half the truth which has prvaled all their other
criticism.
The Stur2i called, in section provided for the
appointment OF three members the hiring OF clerk the paying
OF the of the commissioners and incidental expenses
The following sections provided for the appointment OF deputy
commissioners, who be officers with the powers OF
Of the law Section provided for the commission and
the expense LETT usual in such be provided
for in the general appropriation bill and these expenses
the sum OF $500 was appropriated The OF the
commission proper salaries, clerks incidental
ling expenses has been kept we'll within appropriation
The trainers Of this law took the situation seriously and were
their efforts the enforcement of law
They did take kindly Democratic methods which have
been exhibited acquiescing law and refusing the
put in force. This has always been Democratic
dodge.
When President Roosevelt devong his
ey the development of the civil reform as of
the commissioners charged with this work OF the law
i'll Congress- daring attack the law itself sought cripple
the commission BY lack Of sufficient appropriation
the work.
The friends OF enforcement in the legislature voted for
this Sturgs BILL They did not leave the paw
OF the deputy commissioners to be limited by general appro
priation but provided i'll of the that three com
mssoncrs should be entitled 10 diem and expenses upon
bills to be presented the commission approved BY audited
and paid by the Governor and Council funds in the
State treasury otherwise appropriated thereby placing
the disposal OF the Governor the entire surplus funds of the
treasury for carrying on this work necessity might require
The $500 appropriation the general appropriation
nothing whatever do with the payment Of the bills Of the
deputy commissioners Furthermore provided that
portion OF fines arising from these prosecutions should
be paid into the State treasury to go swell the general
surplus there showing COncISvcy that the we'll formed
intention OF the legislature place the the
sufficient money carry the work had imposed upon
him.
These facts have already been courteosy presented the
Democratic press the interests OF fair play. Democratic
knew the truth the but and are contn