Emmons County record. [volume] (Williamsport, D.T. [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-current, 1907-12-05


tie Evils Of Excessive Liqaor.
Orlnkiag Are 0etter coaesol0o1
BY The llesass Syseen Thoa by
Prohibitiea.
WARRINGTON, d. g., Nov. VI, isO7.
Editor Tribune: My attention was
called to an article in one Of your ne.
cent issues headed: Prohibition and
Temperance. 1t shows highly com.
mendable sentiment on your part, for
truly we may ask wherein the success
OF the prohibitionists is to be found
In view of the fact that the cOnsuml,.
tion of alcoholic beverages Is con-
stantly increasing. or what value Is
the growth of prohibition territory Y
drinking does not decrease?
Can it be said that the, increase OF
drinking is confined merely to other
but prohibition territory? Statistics
rather prove the contrary. Because
statistics show proportionately larg-
err number of arrests for drunkenness
in prohibition cities and In cities with
a very small number Of saloons than
in cities with a large number Of sa-
looms. Likewise in states. And. as drunk
enness is not possible without drink
ing. the increase Of drinking is surely
not confined to wet" territory.
Our federal census bureau publish
es from time to time statistics Of Cit
les. The last publication Is special
report, containing statistics of cities
OF 10000 inhabitants and over for
1905, and about two years ago bulletin
45 was published. giving such stAtis-
tics for cities of between 5000 and
$4,000 inhabitants for 1903. 1t would
OF course take too much space to state
the statistics of all these cities in refcr.
ence to saloons and arrests. A few
examples will suffice. OF course. the
documents give only numbers; the pro.
portions and ratios are my own cal.
culations.
Milwaukee, with 6.l7 saloons fog
each one thousand Inhabitants. had
thirteen arrests for drunkenness and
disturbance OF the peace and 21.73 for
all causes together. for the same mum.
ber Of Inhabitants. Lowell. Mass.
no saloons at all. had 1927 arrests fol
the causes named and 5l.72 for all
causes
Columbus, o., with $50 saloons foI
each 1000 inhabitants. had l1.40 ~.
rests per one thousand Inhabitants f0I
the two causes named and 1854 for all
causes. while Worcester. Mass, witi
only OF saloons, had 1920 arrests fol
drunkenness and disturbance Of the
peace and AZ for all causes.
OF all the cities Of about 5000 in
habitants Rockland. Me-, at the head
with no saloons. had 385 arrests for thk
two causes and 425 for all causes
and Watertown, Wis. at the foot With
the largest number of saloons, had 8
arrests for drunkenness and disturbance
of the peace. and la7 arrests for al
causes.
In New Jersey (license) the number
of arrests in all the cities with be
tween 5000 and 25,OOO inhabitants fol
drunkenness was 9.09 per 1000 In
habitants; in Kansas (prohibition) Il
was l4.6l. The number Of arrests To-
all causes was 1911 in New Jersey and
24O4 in Kansas
And SO on. OF course, the general
conditions. the character of the pOpll
lation, the efforts toward enforcement
of law are unequal, and it cannot bl
expected that the rule works will
mathematical precision. but the fig
ures have an indisputable tendency te
show that prohibition rather results
in an increase than a decrease O
drunkenness and that reduction o.
public drinking places below the mum
ber that is required by ordinary de
mand is of no beneficial effect.
These same statistics show alst
that, generally, taxes are higher II
prohibition territory than in othel
parts of the country. The revenue
from saloon licenses is eliminated ant
the efforts towards law enforcement
require larger police forces and create
more expense.
And yet 1t cannot be denied that IL
spite of the increase of the consumI
ton of alcoholic beverages, in genera
and per capita, drunkenness has de
creased and customs and manner
have improved. There are today NOR
people drinking moderately than form
ery and fewer people drinking in
moderately 1t can hardly be denie
that it is better condition II anon
a hundred people each drink model
; ately than If among hundred peon
y seventy-five abstain entirely and twel
ty-five are drunkards, although PR
hibitionists may deny that As a ma
!, ter of fact the consumption OF bee
containing only between three or fou
percent of alcohol, increases very rapidly
+ while that of whisky increases yer
: little and was few years ago eve
!. decreasing. All this can certainly nc
be ascribed to prohibition It is sin
9 ply the effect OF advancing and pr'
}. crossing culture and civilization
4 uh;ch ,f loft ,nhamnorod will 3