Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-10-21
FIGHT FOR DRY DISTRICT
Secretary Claims That the Law Can
Be Enforced.
LIBERTY NOT INFRINGED UPON
Asserts That Constitution Forbids
Liquor Traffic-Cites Supreme
Court Decisions in Favor of
Total Abstinence.

| The prohibition crusaders of this city
| announce that they have entered upon a
| vigorous campaign, having for its object
the prohibition of the manufacture and
sale of intoxicating beverages in the
| District of Columbia. The crusaders.
| through their secretary. Charles Will
| mans. last night gave out for publication
| reply to the recent anti-prohiultion
| declaration Of Miss Phoebe Couzins I'm
| der the heading. Prohibition Does Pro-
hiDt, Mr.. Williams says; Miss Couzins
| ana the local liquor dealers associations
| are trying to make II appear that the
| prohibition of the liquor traffic is detrl-
| mental to the masses. and therefore Is
| interfering with the personal liberties Of
| citizenship. and 1t cannot be enforced
| anyway. Naturally. those interested In
| the liquor industry of any community
VIII make such arguments as these and
| others to carry theft point.
| Now, as to the assertion of the Per-
sonal Liberty League and others opposed
TO the prohibition of the liquor traffic"
| Mr.. Williams continues, that to ,e-
prive any person of what he enjoys. or
| rather what he seems to enjoy. is de-
| priving him of the personal liberty Of
the American principles. 1 say. fearlessly
| and without favor ii Is not So For to
| allow this drinking habit to go on with
out restriction would result to the Amer
lean people as 1t did with the Romans
Calls Whisky Poison.
1T Is admitted that whisky or alcoholic
beverages create the disease of alcohol
| Ism. thereby certifying that it is a poison,
and this fact is being taught our school
children. which is successful showing in
behalf of the temperance question. Then.
W 1aex{p Ia ta
against 1t, the same as other poisons for
the best interest OF mankind? Enough
solid facts can be produced to prove the
Affirmative of this question. Now what
sensible argument can be advanced by the
opponents to show that this evil should
not be legislated against, and what dam
age will result by having the traffic pro-
hibited?
suit to the personal liberties of the masses
by having the liquor traffic prohibited by
law. Temperance organizations and the
church promote Gods will. thereby bet
tering the cause of humanity and proving
that an Incorporate life Is an unsuccess-
fui one. The commercial world Is crying
out against the drink evil and demanding
total abstainers to conduct their business
showing that the world is awakening on
this evil and will not stop until Ii is finally
eradicated by the root and the traffic stop
ped.
Legislation to Perfection.
Some one is ready to say: you cannot
legislate men into heaven I reply: You
can. you do legislate men into hell
Against this 1 protest. Why place these
stumbling-blocks In lifes pathway with
out necessity? Why entrap the weak and
tempt the strong with occasion to SIM"
Mr.. Williams further contends that the
United States Supreme Court has in sew
eral instances decided that the govern
ment has the, right to suppress the liquor
traffic. He cites several of the decisions.
He also cites the preamble of the Consti-
tuition of the United States and asserts 1t
makes the selling of intoxicants uncon-
stitutional
In conclusion Mr.. Williams defines pro-
hibition. personal liberty and total absti-
hence, and says thousands Of men and
women willing and able to work. are I'M
able to secure employment owing to the
waste of wealth on Intoxicating liquors.
Over a million of our people are drunk
ards and the SORROWS and prfvations of
those dependent upon them have become
hideous blots on our national character