Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1907-06-19


my attention to Mr.. Garvin's reference to
prohibition in Maine and the three rea-
sons which he gives why ''prohibition is
seen to be superficial reform"
The first is purely political, and is pecu-
liarly matter Of personal opinion as dis
tinguished from one OF concrete fact, and
has greater or less weight as political
obligations or fealty rests more or less
lightly upon the individual whose action
is to be determined by the considerations
involved. 1t Is therefore speculative
rather than demonstrative in its character.
The second is one Of fact, so far as the
facts are der,onstrable by attainable data.
The assertion that men get drunk as often
in Maine as in Massachusetts,, and that ''if
the prosperity ola community is rightly
measured by its increase OF wealth and
population, then Maine ranks as one OF
the least prosperous OF all the States"
while somewhat guarded and circum-
scfibed in its scope, is still fair illus
tration Of the hasty and ill-considered
cancellations frequently met with in
the discussion Of this subject by the unin-
formed. Think Maine can successfully
stand the test laid down.
Inasmuch as Massachusetts, has been re-
ferred to by way Of comparison, and as
she il popularity understood to be at least
fair representative OF development in
the line OF moral, social and material well
fare, thus giving an exacting standard,
will confine myself to that state for COM
parsons. All OF the statistics to which
shall refer, unless otherwise specified, are
from the United States census, where they
can be easily verified. They have the ad-
vantage Of being disinterested, and OF all
being taken on the same basis. The
United States during the last decade in
creased in population 20.7 per cent, Mas
sachusetts 25.3 per cent, and Maine per
cent. The percentage Of increase in Mas
sachusetts was a little less than in the
preceding decade. Names about three
times as much, 5 per cent. against 1.s per
cent. 1t is a very pregnant fact in this
connection that, while Names population
in 1900 was only So, 1853, there were then
living in other states 2l6,551 persons who
were born in Maine. 1t is true that Mas
sachusetts made great progress, but Maine
furnished for her 5000, and received in
return only 1900, giving from her small
population more than six times as many
as she received. Il any fair analysis
Names vital contribution OF some OF her
most valuable material to her sister states
must be considered, and when given its
due weight it will clearly appear that she
is by no means tone OF the least proper
Gus OF all the states" from the standpoint
OF population.
Whether or not community has pros
pered during given period, from the ma
terial point of view suggested by Mr.. Gar
vim, clearly depends upon the accumuia-
ton OF wealth per capita, and its increase
or decrease, and there Maine easily out
strips Massachusetts, as her per capita
wealth in 1850 was s210, while in 1900 1t
was $3.50, an increase OF four and one
half times. Massachusetts, had per capita
in 1850, s577, aud in 1900. q ,553, an increase
of only two and four-fifths times.
This is the period covered by the Maine
law. Moreover, from 1880 to 1902 Maine
has decreased her Indebtedness per capita
80. and Massachusetts has increased hers
by the same amount. The town OF ray
mond. Maine, is relatively typical OF the
States material development. Prior to
1881. with 1872 souls, with valuation
OF about $4,000, per capita s126, it is
estimated from actual sales taken rom
old account-books, that the value OF liquor
consumed in every period OF eighteen
years was more than the entire Vaiuatioh
OF the town. To-day no hquor-taS Is paiu
in the town; and, while the popuiatioh
has decreased to SOB, the valuation mas IN
creased to s2ls,o72, or $50 per CAPITA
doubling in per capita wealth. The popu-
lation of Massachusetts, in 1900 was z'soo'
3l6, in round numbers four times tha' oi
Maine, and in the analysis to follow, IN
order to stand on level with Maihe' 'hA'
propo-tion should be maintained.