The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1907-03-13
WINNERS. FAV0RED PROHIBITION
Of MANUFACTURE OF LIQUORS
D. Society Won in Debate Against Adelphi on Tuesday
Evening For the aansl Medal-Young Ladies on Both
Sides Made Strong Arguments

wrong" Prohibition does this for the
man tempted by liquor.
Miss Ward, the second speaker for
the negative, maintained that the pro-
hibition law is wrong in principle,
and that 1t does not represent public
sentiment. Eighty-two per cent Of
the brain workers in the United States
use intoxicating liquors. This atti-
tude is not commendable but 1t is
fact.
The prohibition law is wrong in
principle. 1t goes beyond the func-
ton of law and tries to set a high
ethical standard, whereas it should
try to set only practical standard
and compel obedience to 1t.
Violated Everywhere.
The prohibition law does not pro-
hibit. 1t is violated on every hand.
In North Dakota the town that does
not have blind pigs is an exception,
except in the western part where the
pigs are not blind.
For instance, in our capitol city
there are IS open saloons!
There are some communities where
the prohibition law is enforced, but
these are places where neither the
prohibition law nor the Gothenburg
system is required. They will have
prohibition at any price. There is no
need for dispensary there, and the
conditions would be the same un,ier
any system.
showing the exact consumption of the
liquor traffic in prohibition states.
There are statistics however, which
show the increase of the liquor bust
ness. North Dakota last year had is
sued to it's residents 1,64S federal Ii
censes as against 1929 in South Da-
kota, liquor state with 10000 more
inhabitants.
Has Increased.
Looking to the success of prohibi-
ton In other states we see that in
Kansas the liquor traffic increased
$50 per cent from 1896 to 1906, while
the census shows an increase of pop
ulation Of only Is per cent. The man
ufacture of liquor is constantly in
creasing in that state in spite of the
law prohibiting it.
Prohibition has been given a fair
trial. Eighteen states have at one
time or another been prohibition
states. Now only four remain. If
this shows the success of prohibition
it is poor species of success. Then.
too, we have many "little Germanys"
in this country, and to prevent the
people in these communities from
having their drink of beer is as fu-
tile as to prohibit spinster from
enjoying her tea.
Are Criminals.
The prohibition system has an edu-
cative value tending only toward the
bad. The sellers are criminals;
they sell to everyone; the law is
made a dead letter. Carrie Nation
got the idea that all law was dead
letter and as a consequence made
her famous raids.
I'",r Arguments.
Miss Wyant, third speaker for the
affirmative, after summing up the ar
guments Of the affirmative, developed
four strong arguments in support of
the affirmative.
First. Prohibition is the only sys-
TEN which does not compromise with
the liquor evil. The Gothenburg sys-
TEN places the stamp of government
approval upon the evil. This truly
is a dangerous policy.
Second. The prohibitory law is ed
ucative. We must have law in order
to educate public sentiment. The ad-
vocates Of the Gothenburg system de-
clare that public sentiment is not yet
educated to accept absolute prohibi-
ton but it is absurd to advocate that
we must wait for the perfection of
public sentiment. As we'll might
Moses have waited before laying down
the ten commandments.
Third. Prohibition brands the IL
quor traffic as crime. Even if blind
pigs operate under the prohibition
law the men who frequent them are
branded by the enlightened citizens
of the community as degenerates
-Four. The Gothenburg system is
immoral in it's aim. The prohibitory
law aims at total elimination. Since
no system can rise higher than its
aim We must conclude the superiority
of prohibition.
Was Good.
Mary B. Pennington, the third
speaker for the negative, argued that
the Gothenburg system is right in
principle. that it is practical, and that
1t has the merit of fexibility. 1t has
the additional advantage that it can
be enforced.
The profits of the liquor traffic
should go to the community. South
Carolina has the idea of profit for
the state. This is not our idea. But
despite this error on the part of the
South Carolina system the committee
of fifty says that the Gothenburg sys-
tenn has been more thoroughly en-
forced in that state than any system
OF prohibition ever was or ever could
be. We have statistics which show
that while South Carolina had a dis
pensary for every $500 people, North
Dakota had blind pig for every 4S9
inhabitants. In South Carolina too,
the system has reduced the per capita
consumption one half
In addition the Gothenburg system
has a high educative value. Statistics
show that so per cent of Chicago's
residents daily visit a saloon. This