Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1907-12-26

Today, 1t behooves every American
citizen to carefully study the prohibit
ton Of the liquor traffic. 1t is the
greatest moral and financial politica:
question ever before the people for set
tlement There is no middle ground
upon which the two factions can COM
promise. The free and untrameled
trade in intoxicants and absolute pro-
hibition are antipodes to. each other.
Prohibition versus the legalized liquor
traffic will be the issue.
Politically the nation has advanced
beyond the local option stage in the
county, state and national prohibition.
Politically the voters are now choos-
ing as to which of the great future
political organizations they will. at
fiilliate with. Like the old Abolition
party on the slavery question: the pro-
hibition party is rapidly forcing the
issue to the front. Like that party,
this party has it's martyrs in Haddock.
it's Wendell Phillipses, in John b.
Cough, Neal Dow and others. History
has repeated itself in prohibitionists
being maligned, legged, stoned. mobbed
and murdered for the cause Of prohi-
bition Life and treasure had to be
sacrificed to focus the attention of the
American voter and legislator on to
prohibition. the greatest of all political
questions the nation ever met.
A new party had to be born to do
this work, because both old parties
were made up of anti and pro-liquor
voters. Other organizations like the
anti-saloon league could teach the
moral and financial effect upon society,
but could not reach the ballot box be-
yond the local non-political action, as
to license or no license. This has
proven ineffective against the financial
and political power Of the organized
liquor traffic, thus all eyes are turning
toward state and national prohibition
The historian Of events tells us that
the success Of any reform, great or
small, or of any undertaking OF much
magnitude, either in business or in
government, must have force behind
it that makes the issue its vital cause.
Judicial decisions have fully settled
the vested authority to prohibit man
ufacture and sale of intoxicants. Have
settled the Personal Liberty argu-
ment by holding that man has no per-
sonal liberty, but what must be sur
rendered when the best interests of So
ciety demand it. Dealers in intoxicants
are legally established. They exist,
not by an inherent right, nor by
common law privilege, but by permits
sion. Courts hold that this permit can
be renewed, may expire, or may be
withheld Because of this knowledge
4-{c y1,nyo
put out Of business there is no redress
in an action for damages or for loss
of property. This being the case in the
great political campaign before us the
liquor traffic can not plead injustice
before the bar of public opinion in the
enactment and enforcement of pro-
hibitory laws.
The constitution of the United States
vests in the state the sole power to
regulate or prohibit the liquor traffic
within it's borders. 1t grants no rights
to any body to manufacture or deal
in liquors within any state in the I'M
ion. 1t merely collects revenue wher-
ever the sale is carried on and does
not inquire whether the vender has
state license or not. There is a bill be-
fore congress to stop the government
from collecting revenue unless the
dealer first presents his permit from
the state.
If passed the illicit dealer will meet
the penalties for violating the revenue
law and still be subjected to punish
ment by the state. Under the Original
package decision" interstate commerce
places the liquor into the hands of the
party to whom it is sent before state
Jurisdiction begins. There is bill