The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1906-09-07
r. c. LEvERE DISCOURS-
ES ON THE QUES-
TION
.EPITOME OF WORK DONE
Review of Inhibitiye Pro-
cedure From Early Days

Editor Leader Noticing much is
being printed in the papers Of oklaho-
ma ON the question of prohibition and
seeing that this question will be put
forward the coming campaign. i'm
PEELED me to period Of research.
have found some highly interesting
data
During the colonial days nearly all
of the colonies from Maine tc Georgia
enacted, at different times laws prohi-
biting, in various ways, the manufac-
ture and sale of liquors, and in some
instances cr tobacco also. These laws
were uniformly disregarded, and were
productive of numerous evil conse-
quences. SO impossible was II to en-
force them, and so great were the
abuses growing out of them, that they
rarely remained upon the statute books
more than a few years Such expert
ments were repeated from time to
time, always with like results until to-
wards the Revolution, when they were
given up.
The coltmial experience with prohibi-
tory laws SO impressed the people that
during the first seventy years Of in
dependence little or no effort was
made in the direction OF prohibition.
Between 1850 and 1860. however
there was a revival OF proh!bitory ef
forts, and laws were enacted in vari
Gus tates forbidding the Manufacture
and sale a intoxicating liquors.
Maine adopted prohibition in 1851
and still has It on her books. but It has
never been enforced, and in the towns
and cities of that state the open sa
loon is as familiar and public as in
any state in the Union.
Vermont followed Maine in 1852 by
the adoption cf prohibitory laws, and
kept them continually on her statute
books, for half a century In the ef
folt to enforce these laws severe an,
unusual punishments, search without
warrant and denial of trial by jury
we're resoited to, the accused was
forced to testify against himself, the
courts became prosecuting onicers
and a process Of Injunction was adopt
ed rWnous to innoceDt parties. Three
conyi tions We're allowed for a single
pftense, and informers were stimu
lated by fees and shares of fnes--anC
all to no purpose. lntempetance ant
contempt Of law steadily increased
In 1902, at the end of fifty years the
report of the United States commits
sioner df internal revenue showed
That one United States license L
sell liquor was issued for every l2l
voters in the state. In the fall of 100.
movement was inaugurated locking
TO the adoption OF a license system
! The campaign which terminated in th'
overthrow Of prohibition was in man'
respects remarkable. Arrayed on the
side Of license were the progressive
clements Of the state, supported by
men In all walks of life, Of the bes
thought and highest morsls-men pro
/ fc1adly impressed with the futility an,
/ bad results ( the law Arrayed viii
the prohibitionists were the Illicit
Hquor allers, who preferred the un
restricted sale under prohibition to
regulated trade under license.
On iolr separate occasions duriul
( the campaign the voters Of the STATE
showed their disapproyal Of prohibI
tion-ln the eaacuses. in the legis
lature. in the election when they v,te'
on the question direst. and hnall,
when the towns voted on license
March 3, 1903. on the last occasion
eighty even towns all in the state o
any size declared for license.
New Hampshire adopted statutor,
prohibition in 1855. For thirty-f.m al
years every effort was made 70 Ell
force II, with results so rar from sai
isiactory and sd Injurious that at
popular election for the adoption of
prohibit ny amendment TO the stat
constitution held April i2. 1883, tn
amendment was defeatcd by an enorn