New-York tribune., 1907-09-23
HONE RTTF.

A great deal has been said and doubtless VIII
continue to be said about home rule and local
option in the New Jersey campaign. with REFER
ence of course 10 the control Of the liquor
traffic. It has chiefly been provoked py tle
operations Of the so-called Bishops law, which
forbds the sale of Intoxicating drinks on sun
day. and IT is heard chiefly III the counties OF
Essex and Hudson, for the obvious reason thaI
in them are the two largest cities of the state
and also the principal brewing and distlIiills
interests and. therefore. the most thirsty oe oe
mand for the opening of barrooms on All
days of the week Most of all discussion RACES
in Essex County, where a particularly efLcleh'
Sheriff enforces the law with fidelity winch
is reputed not TO be eQualed IN every otiler
county.
Home rule and local option mean, at least IN
theory precisely the same thing-to wit, that
each municipality shal! determine for itseI
whether LIQUOR shall be sold within lis Doruers
and on what conditions. and whether II shalI pe
sold on Sundays. The principle is strongly bul hot
always discriminatory favored by both sides IN
the terDerance controversy, by the one under the
one name and by the other under the other L or
years temperance advocates have been pleading
for local option. Oh the ground that 1t Wcuid en-
able any place 10 prohibit the liquor Haue
Likewise. saloon interests have demanded home
from puritanical restrictions. 1t IS doubtful II
all The temperance advocates have realized that
local option might also mean the licensing OF
the lioIlor trade and even the opening of all
bars on Sundays or Il the saloon people have
in mind the possibility that home rule might
mean absolute prohibition. Yet such is, OF
course the case
There is much 10 be said on both sides of the
question. Within certain limits home rule in
most matters is doubtless desirable but ii is not
always easy to prescribe the limits. SO TO
certain extent uniformity throughout the state
.s desirable, but men do not always agree as to
the extent. Moreover. it is not entirely clear 10
what degree there shall be subdivision of the
state for purposes of home rule. Some say It
should be by counties. others by cities. boToushs
and villages while others would subdivide cities
into wards If the large cities object to having
their saloons closed on Sundays to silt the will
of the rural majority Of the state. so one ward
Of a city might object TO having its saloons
closed at the dictation Of the other wards, and
it is easy TO imagine the rural villages Of such
county as Essex protesting vigorously against
having their, saloons opened on Sundays by the
votes of the urban population in that county
No doubt the dram drinkers of New Jersey
dislike to go without their drinks on Sundays
But really they are in no worse plight than
tlelr DretOrcn IN oI1er SlaleS. even III New
York No doubt the saloons in Essex County
regard it as a hardship TO be closed on Sundays
when those in some other counties are open
more or less surrepttiously-on that day. But
that is not the fault Of the law, but Of those
intrusted with its enforcement, and precisely
the same thing might happen under home rule
If home rule or local option were enacted in
the form which some desire we might see New
ark anhall Essex County closed up tight all the
time under prohibition rule and Jersey City
and Hudson County wide open for seven days a
week Or we might see the saloons of Newark
open, those of East Orange closed and those Of
Orange open. Wouldn't that be Il sumptuary
sandwich: