Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1908-09-12

altles for its violation. Our opponent.
say the Legislatures enacted theil
statutes to fool the people. Why argue
such a proposition? The voters; Of oul
State are intelligent and is 1t creditabl.
to believe that for so years the repre-.
sentativeS of the people have cOntin.
uously misrepresented the will Of theil
constituents? | say it is fair to argue
that in their laws they have reelected
the wishes of a large majority of thcil
constituents and especially as regards
this law which has always been a
source of agitation.
Everyone who is law abiding either
| will agree that such a law as long as
| it is a law should be enforced It's null
| LITIGATION can have no honorable de-
fence. Yet the history of the public
statutes in this State shows that the
enemies OF any restrictive law relating
| to any subject are very active, not
! always TO obtain the repeal OF the
law, but rather to secure the nullifica-
ton OF the prohibtory law. The real
| enforcement depended upon the will
OF Is men, the ShcriffS in the Ii coun :
ties of our State, and the police depart
ments of the various cities No matter
| who the Governor was, he was help-
less to do more than advise. The sher-
IFS and police departments dependent
alone upon the votes which elected
them could ignore the commands of the
Governor. The liquor interests, aware
of this fact, became more and more
aggressive and when troubled by en-
forcement simply placed themselves or
the side of that sheriff who would pro
tect their interests. The movement OF
nullification became more and more
open until in every city and large
town the saloon was openly located
and doing business in violation oi this
law. This fragrant violation of the law
was SO offensive to the laW-ab;dine
citizens of the State that it became a
burning question in the municipal,
county and State elections whether
such law breakers should rule or be
ruled. We always found the Democratic
organization with the law breaker,
preaching home rule and holding out
to these saloon keepers and their de-
luded sympathiZers the hope of a H.
cenSe law Not limited licenses but free
Ecense-for if it was limited license
what saloon keeper in Maine today
would hope to obtain such a license?
This Democratic organization where
there was Republican sheriff enforc-
ing the law was always joining with
the saloon and its forces to secure a
sheriff who would nullify it, and finally
advanced so far as to elect 4 sheriff
in Cumberland county who openly up
on the public platform acknowledged
that he was a nullifer of the law This
condition prevailed four years ago when
Governor Cobb was elected. The cry
was against other Governors for not
enforcing the prohibitory law when the
fault was that it's enforcement was
practically in the hands of is different
sheriffs, Independent of the Governor
OF his wishes. They could be impeached
by the Legislature if charges were pre-
ferred and sustained, but the I4egis-
lature convened only once in two years
unless specially called and which in
this way was thus practically useless
Governor Cobb. like the honest man
that he is, saw the limitation OF his
power and when the Sturgis law was
proposed endorsed it because it was
designated to correct this evil which
permitted any sheriff to violate his
duty respecting this law. 1t simply said
If the commission found that the sher-
if of any county was derelict in his
duty. they could put deputy commits
Sioner there to do the work 1t was de-
signed to make this enforcement gen.
cral through this State and not de-
pendent upon the sweet will of any
single sheriff or policeman of any one
locality. Did it accomplish this work .
| can speak from personal observa-
ton in my own city. When the StGrgis
deputies were operating in kenrebec
county there wasn't an open saloon in
the city of Gardiner, and I doubt if
there was one in any of the cities of
Eennebec valley.
The Democrats had been crying for
years because we did not enforce this
law and now they are bowling because
we have the power and exercise it to
enforce the law. We never expected to
pass a law that would please them,
but there are some good citizens who.
misunderstanding the object and scope
of this law. would like to satisfy and
they are the ones who would like to
know whether the people of this State
do really believe in the prohipitory
law. They are law-abiding citizens who
believe in other ways of restricting the
sale of intoxicating liquors and would
like to have this amendment to the
Constitution again submitted to the
people to ascertain the opinion of the
people upon its merits as law. They
do not believe in multiplying any law
OF sustaining any law breakers. They
are honest citizens and to them I an
peal for fair hearing. Believing as
you DO that all law should be upheld,
and knowing law has been and is OPEN
ly violated with the knowledge and
consent of the snerifts. realizing as you
must that practically no power can
reach them to oblige them to do their
duty, do you condemn the passage Of
this measure? 1t was intended for
CONTINUED on Page TWeIve.)