The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1909-02-05
LOCAL OPTION Fight
WILL CUT IMPORTANT FIGURE m THE
NEXT CAMPAIGN
A Practical View From an Opponent
Of Prohibition

capture majority of the Legislature.
In order 10 vote intelligently ON this
or any other question. a man should
read both sides. and TO AFFORD our read
ers this opportunity we print below
an article from the Baltimore Sun In
opposition TO prohibition
The meeting held In this city on
Sunday under the auspices of the Anti
Saloon League seems to marx the be-
ginning OF a campaign against the
liquor business In this State and 10
bring the people face 10 face with the
possibility Of prohibition In thla city.
Upon several occasions In the past
Statewide" local option bills have
presented IN the Legislature and more
thnn once they have come near enact
ment, n is but due TO the nniisaloou
agitat0rs TO Eay that their object II
the prohibition of the sale OF spirit
uous liquor everywhere In the stalk
What they want IL 10 prohibit gine
manufacture and sale OF liquors every
where In the State. and ultimately
'Viake the whole United States pfohi-
Mfion country. Prohibllloniats have
uAged Ia the past an amendment 10
thu Constitution OF the United States
which would empower Congress 10
make illegal by a single enactment
the liquor trafiic In all the States and
Territories OF the Union.
IF the local option bills were sup
ported In the Legislature by men who
are honestly opposed 10 the use Of
liquor, people could al least accept
these laws with greater equanImity
But u II n weli-known fact that many
for the laws use strong drink and do
not consider lts use a moral question.
They are induced 10 vote for
The bills BY men uho can see but
one side OF the situation aud who
close their eyes to facts. The agents
OF these weii-ncaning supporters OF
prohibition iniimIdate candidates and
extoTt pledges from them. Laws On.
acted under such conditions do NOT
command obedience A depioynhle
feature OF the business IL the intro.
duction OF pernlciouH element into
politics, The result IL the defeat ol
good men for the legislature who ara
too honest W -r4rdga themselves "a
support prohibitory measures and the
election OF men who viii pledge them.
selves TO anything In order TO gcs
votes.
The prohibition sentiment has made
great progress IN Maryland or the
~ counties there are only two In no
part of which the sale Of splFltuouA
liquor IL prohibited. These two coun.
ties are ~. Mafy's and Charles. In
ten counties the sale ~ llquOr is ab,
soluiely prohibited. In Hartford. Cal.
vert and Howard counties saloons are
permitted in one town In each. aud
the other counties are partially dry. =
That IL 90 say. legally dry" but
not actually 40. The object Of the
AniiHaloon League now seems 10 be
10 add baltimore city TO dry" terri
toTy, aud the business people aud The
taxpayers Of the city are face to face
with that proposition and must con.
slider Il.
II cannot be doubted that the pro.
hlbition Of the liquor trafiic In nal.
ttmore would. by the loss of revenue
compel an increase in the tax rate and
make the taxes enormously burden
densome: that Il would injuriously AZ.
iect the trade of the city; that the cf-
tort To enforce the law would involve
an enormous expense, and that prop
esrty, especially hotel property. would
decrease In value. More than this, II
we are to judge by the experience in
other cities where prohibitory laws
have been enacted. a prohIbitory Law
10 baltimore would directly result in
an increase In drunkenness.
Last year the city received from
liquor license f753.237.i4 and the State
got s303.160.3s. Besidea this. the tar
upon spirits in bond should bring
TO the city t23.4OO and TO the STATE
about 5000. How much the city tar
upon the property OF the saloons IA,
the stock I'm trade and the fIxturea
upon the distilleries and brewerIeH we
nave not ascertained. But II Ia safe
70 say that the city received last wear
over a million dollars from this
source. The Antisaloon League pro-
poses TO remit this tar, and Il will
have 70 be made good In some other
way. The city. burdeRed with its or
binary debts, to which are added the
loans Tor sewers, street paving. water
extensions and other inevitable
eharges against, II cannot spare the
revenue. The loss OF this revenue
would mean an addition OF not less
ihan "a cents 10 the local tax rate
and some 5 cents 20 the State rnfe
TO thht must be added something 10
cover tho enormous cost OF attempting
TO enforce a law which cannot be en-
forced.
That prohibition docs not decrease
the use OF liquor Is proved TO a math-
emaucal certainty by the receipts of
the United States Government from its
liquor licenses and tax on splrituous
liquors. In order to escape certain
punishment by the Federal authorities
the diyekeeper and the speak-easy In
"a prohibition State must take out a
Federal license. And, according TO a
dispatch from Washington published
In The Sun today. the enactment OF q
prohibitory law In State does not
decrease the number OF these licenses
Issued. III II we're constitutional for
Congress to enact prohibItory law
for the whole country IL would de-
priye the United States Of revenues OF
probably $215, 1000, 900 year and would
require the general Government to
burden the people with such taxes as
are generally levied In war times, In
order to make up the deficiency.
Nowhere has the prohibition plan
had faiFer test than In the State Of
Main. Not only has II been illegal
to sell liquor In that State, but for
fifty years It has been unconstitution-
al. And now we have the testimony
OF Mr.. Holman Day. an honorable and
reputable citizen Of that State, In an