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

four years OF age is as follows:
4 1870 1850 1890 1900
Maine. ls1 22i 25s 25a
Massachusetts,, 100 las 1854 ISIS
-
/ Excess, IS 70 50 n
I in the consideration of any analysis like
; the foregoing it is always to be remem-
! bered that there is nothing in the policy
or law of Maine that differentiates her
+ from her sister states except the prohibit
! tory law.
I No reason is perceived why the people
of Maine should not feel well satisfied
with the result of this comparison and
analysis, as, instead of showing that she
/ is ''one of the least prosperous of all the
states, it demonstrates that she is easily
1 one of the most prosperous.
/ The third reason given by Mr.. Garvin
seems to proceed upon the hypothesis that
( while the 'ssobriety of the head of a fam
/ ily'' is undoubtedly blessing to himself
and its members, ''its immediate effect
would be to injure the men and families
already sober and industrious" and is
therefore to be deprecated. He clearly
! utillOHstfdlts 10 Ills oNu sdiielacliOH. at
least, that, '.should the inebriates become
sober and industrious, they would enter
the labor market in competition with
those already at work, wages would fall,
and the family of the sober laborer would
get the minimum wage, which now goes
| to the family afflicted with an incorporate
and idle head; therefore men should re-
! ~, sv.a a.
| to change them from inebriates is ''super-
I ficialn.
| 1t is no doubt true that "political econ
omy teaches that wages tend to mini
mum" but, if Mr.. Garvin means to be
understood that by reason of that general
axiom political economy teaches that in
ebriates should remain inebriates, as
otherwise, if they became sober, their
competition would reduce the sober to
the inebriates' minimum wage", then /
! feel obliged vigorously to dissent from
such conclusion, as know of no politi-
cal economy that teaches the essentially
false and brutal proposition that, in order
for man to contribute to the welfare Of
the community in which he lives, he must
I
sive burden upon it. All sound political
economy that is worthy Of the name
teaches the best methods of promoting
the general welfare, and is based upon
the fundamental axiom that each individ-
ual is bound to make the most OF himself
and to develop the maximum of his ca
pacity as a producer. Producers and not
consumers are the great factors in con-
serving the public veal. A theory that
makes of man consumer, and deliber-
ately deprives him of the capacity to pro-
duce, is contrary to all teachings of polit-
ical economy.
1t is true that, where an inebriate be-
comes sober, h. has some tendency to re-
vive q competition hitherto dormant, and
that condition that has some tendency
to reduce wages is factor in the whole
equation of the general welfare; but it is
| only one, and q minor one at that. To
predicate general conclusion upon such
| a minor factor is to reach a conclusion
that instinctively repels every right think
ing person, and could not be the result of
the operations of a well-ordered mind act
ing upon sound premises.
II the argument that, il inebriates are
made sober, sober men will have more I'M
| Justifab bic competition and be compelled
| to work for less wages, be meritorious,
| then inebriates should remain inebriates
More than that, in order that the welfare
| of the sober men should be more effectively
promoted, more sober men should be made
| inebriates, thus relieving the remaining
sober of part of the competition they now
have and enabling them to increase their
wages. Then, while it may be, as seems to
be admitted, that a young man may be
| s'wise in being total abstainer'', he could
hardly be said on this refined theory to be
inspired by any laudable desire to pro-
mote the welfare of his ''sober" fellows, as
by that course he engages in competition
with them. II this theory is sound al
trinsically, every body but the favored few
should be an inebriate, thus conserving
the welfare of the sober at the expense OF
the drunken.
Instead OF this imaginary deleterious
competition resulting in a change from
inebriety to sobriety Caused or tending to
be caused, it is assumed, by prohibition)
being reason why prohibition is 'super-
| fetal REFORM, it furnishes one of the most
persuasive and potential reasons why pro-
hibition, as effectively minimizing the
evils flowing from the traffic in intoxicat-
ing liquors, is well worthy the support of
all who are DESTROYS Of promoting the gem
eral welfare, as such change is clearly
from every point of view wise and desir-
able.
When inebriety is preferable to sobriety,
then there will be something in the third
reason. mere statement of this reason
| shows that the reason, and not the prop
osition which i is sought to sustain by it,
is superficial"