Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-03-14

parties gain or lose because Oh tne IS
sue interests me not There are a rev
lquestions which rise above mere partl-
son purposes and cheap political aims.
| ResubmiSsion is such a question, ana
we should approach its consideration
lactuated only by disinterested ana
patriotic motives. l have little SYM
pathy with any man who would argue
this moral problem, a problem Whlcn
| so vitality concerns us as a people ana
has such moral and economic signlh-
canoe, from the low plans OF mere
party expediency. This Legislature has
| before it matters of grave moment,
but none more grave than this. indeed
so great is this issue that other mat
tiers might we'll wait on its solution.
We are met here by a question which
touches our moral life, our economic
we'll being, our reputation, our public
and private honor, our social virtues.
| There must be good reasons for re-
submitting this question TO the people.
else we have no right to tamper with
the constitution of the State. The rea-
sons which l shall give are the results
of years of study and observation. L
| shall go too far for many on this floor,
and if / am in error, you VIII charge
it against me only as an error of Judg-
ment. After half a century of Prohl-
| bitiOn, it is time that this question was
| frankly discussed. 1t has been said
| that reSubmlSSion means condemna-
| ton of the prohibitory law, and l agree
| that this is SO. 1t can not be other
wise. Did l believe that prohibition is
right in theory and worked well III
practice, / should want no other sys-
| TEN. Did l think that prohibition is
the best solution of the iiquu- traffic
and did l know that it makes Cor tenn
perance and sObriety, l should be I'M
willing to take it out of our constitu-
| ton. 1t is deep seated conviction
with me that prohibition as a State
policy is radically wrong in theory.
failure in practical application. Our
liquor legislation is all wrong, and for
more than fifty years we have blum
dered and bungled in this matter We
have been neither wise, consistent nor
honest, and have deluded ourselves
but we have not deceived the world.
ReSubmissiOn can not be discussed
without Il discussion of the prohibitOry
law. ! believe the demand for reSub-
mission is justified in the light of the
history of State prohibition, and |
might preface this reference to the
history of the question by quoting the
words of Bishop Potter. Speaking of
prohibition in all its phases Bishop
Potter has referred to it as tainted
with falsehood, dishonored by essential
unreality and discredited by wide
spread and consistent failure
In all II states have cat some time,
experimental with prohibition. OF the
| II Kansas, North Dakota and Maine
are left The State of Maine led in the
prohibitory movement, the first pro-
hibitory law having been adopted in
1851. Between 1851 and 1854 a wave of
prohibtOry sentiment swept New Eng
land reaching out to other states.
Within those years all of the New
England States adopted prohibitory
laws. Today Maine stands alone among
her sister New England States in this
matter. Prohibition was adopted in
Connecticut in 1854, and license and
| local option substituted in 1872. In
! 1889 a prohibition amendment to the
constitution was defeated by popular
vote. Rhode Island adopted prohibition
in 1852. In 1875 q license and local OPP
ton law was passed. In 1886 prohibi-
tory amendment to the constitution
was adopted by popular vote. Three
years later this amendment was re-
submitted to the people and was an
nulled. Massachusetts adopted in 1852
a prohibitory law similar to the Maine
law. The law, however, was repealed
in 1874. In 1899 a prohibitory amend
ment to the constitution was defeated
| by popular vote. Prohibition in New
hampshire dates from 1855. An at
tempt to write the law into the con-
stitution was defeated by the people in
1889. New Hampshire has had license
and local option since 1893. In YER
mont the prOhibtOry law went into
effect in 1852. After fifty years of dis
aStrOus experiment Vermont repeated
the prohibition law and substituted Ii
cense and local option in 1902. In all
the states that have had prohibtory
laws and repealed them the policy is
admitted to have been a failure. Mas
sachusettS widely known for it's laws,
it's great men, its marvellous prosper
| ity and its magnificent institutions, the
vigor of its manhood and the peace of
its homes, knew enough to stop the
great farce in 1874. For third of a
and improved under license and local
option. At the end of this half GEN.
fury of statutory and constitutional
prohibition the people of Maine who
have carefully observed and who think
deeply come to sit in judgment upon
this prohibitory policy The history is
one to make us blush with shame
Modification far from being the ex-
ception during all these years has been
the rule. The law has played into the
hands of the more vicious class. 1T
has corrupted men in politics. It has
confused the judiciary. 1t has blunted
our conscience. No man has played
with 1t for political purposes who has
come forth with clean hands 1t has
made possible an alliance between the
liquor interests and the machine poll
ucian. 1t never made for sobriety
and in all these years it has
placed premium upon political dishonor
and made perjury safe, popular and
profitable. Viewed in the light of its his
tory. submit that the prohibtory policy
of the State of Maine is unworthy tha