Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1906-09-13

sures IN 1870. They were never en-
forced and were o o abandoned. In
1892 q second effort was made ia I'M
pose prohibition IN the state, but
was defeated by the biggest majority
east in that state on any question for
twenty years,
Nebraska in the same year adonted
prohibition, but its enforcement was
found impossible and It was soon re-
pealed. A second effort vas made in
1880 and was defeated by a decisive
majority of 10000,
The Legislature of Illinois enacted
a Prohibitory law in 1880, but 1t was
so unpopular with the people of the
state that in the election in the fall
of the same year both the law and its
champions were buried.
Twice the effort was made to fas
ten prohibition on Wisconsin and
twice the governor internosed his veto
with hearty concurrence with the peo-
pie. This was in 1888. Since that
time a more liberal spirit has guided
the state.
Under prohibition laws Iowa wit
messed an exodus of her population,
a depression of her commercial inter
ests, accompanied by great moral re-
Progression and a complete revolution
in her political status. The law was
enacted in 1884. So calamitous were
the results that in obedience to over
whelming popular demand it was mod
flied and practically abandoned a few
years ago.
Kansas has been under o%rohibitory
laws for the last twenty-five years,
having adopted them in 1889. That
they are ineffective is demonstrated
by the open saloons and secret joints
in all the towns and cities Of the state.
That they are detrimental to the wei
fare of the state is proved by the de-
preston in her commercial, manufac-
turing and industrial enterprises, and
by the enormous tax rates prevalent,
ranging from four to eight per cent,
That they have not been beneficial to
the moral tone of the state is evinced
by the fact that thousands of the best
men of the state earnestly advocate
the overthrow Of the law.
An effort was made in 1887 to put
prohibition into the constitution OF
Texas and failed by a majority of
92,6Gl.
A few months later a similar effort
was made in Tennessee, and was like
wise overwhelmed by a majority OF
27,693.
In the fall of the same year Ore
gon submitted a p%rohibitorv amend
ment, which shared a similar fate,
fully two-thirds of the voters of the
state casting their ballots against it.
In November, 1888, West Virginia
voted on the question. The subject was
thoroughly discussed, Investigations
into the workings of the law in other
states was carefully made, and a full
vote was polled, resulting in the de.
feat of the amendment by a majority
of 1854. Only two counties in the
state gave prohibition ma.jorities.
North Dakota adopted prohibition
in 1889 by a scant majority of 1,l59
The experience of the state has beer
the usual one. The law has not beer
enforced. The sale of liquors has il
no way diminished and the only eff
feet has been the substitution of The
unlicensed, irresponsible secret join.
for the open regulated saloon. A
movement is on foot looking to the
overthrow of the law.
South Dakota also adonted prohibi
ton in 1889 by a majority of 5,724
Every possible means controlled by
the state were exhausted in an un
availing effort to enforce the law. The
DEVELOPMENT of the state, which haC
been phenomenal during the ter
years prior to the adoption of the
measure, was brought to a standstill
At the fall election of 1896 prohibi
ton was overwhelmingly rejected and
the state returned to a license sys,
TEN.
1t will thus be seer that during the
past half century eighteen states have
tried the experiment of prohibition
Fifteen of these states have repudi.
ated it as an utter failure. Five OF
the states thus repudiating it have
overwhelmingly rejected attemrtS tC
foist it on them a second time. Three
states only retain it. In none of these
is it inforced. Five other states, nro
filing by the experience of sister com.
monwealths, have refused to accent il
at all. If experience and history have
any value, these facts ought to be
conclusive hat prohibition is neither
practicable nor desirable from either
amoral or material standpoint.
The experience of communities
which have tried local prohibition OF
local option differs in no way from
that of the states which have tried
prohibition. II has uniformly failed
to prohibit and BROUGHT in its wake
a long train of attendant evils and
disaster. From 1890 to 1903, 1855
communities have voted on the sub.
ject of local option. In $40 of these
communities local option was defeat.
ed bv annroximatel" a two-thirds