The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-10-01
BY F. w. HARE i.


 To one seeking earnestly to always be on the side of right, 1t is no small matter to have his best friends publicly and privately accuse him of being in league with immoral~forces,b but 1t Is the duty of all honest men to take stand for what they believe to be right, notwithstanding they may subject themselves to unjust criticism. It Is true that the question of the adoption of the amendment is a moral question. just as all governmental and political questions are, In their ultimate analy- ais. moral questions. It can not be denied that the trusts. the tariff, and slavery are each moral questions. l do not consider this question as political question in the narrow &C., equation of that world Insofar as 1t might, or might not, affect the poliu- cal fortunes or misfortunes of any man. or set of men. but in a broad sense of the world, 1t is a political question and one upon which all good citizens. ministers as well as laymen. should take a stand. I think 1t the right privilege and duty of every minister to privately, and If he choose. publicly express his convictions upon an questions so long as he does not Seek to have the church, as an organi- eAtion, endorse his views, and thereby, en moral effect at least. excommunicate and stigmatize those members of the church who. however honestly and earnestly. may disagree with him upon the particular question at issue.
 No man can claim to be a good citi- zen and not deprecate and deplore the evfls of intemperance. No man mak- ing such claims can refuse to use his best efforts to promote the cause of temperaince in the way that seems best n YItxx Y zens believe that this much- to- be de- sired end can be best attained through local option. while others think that the dispensary is the solution of the problem; nor can the honesty and good faith of these citizens be questioned But watving any consideration of the merits of either of these plans, and also passing by for the present the much disputed question of whether or not constitutional prohibition would effectively allay agitation, there are, as have been pointed out, potent req sons inherent in the amendment itself which impell me to the sincere belief that 1t would be dangerous and un- wise for the people to adopt 1t. These reasons are not only based upon what believe to be sound public policy, but arc based upon sound principles of morality and good government.
 
 ton of the proposed amendment would have the effect If adopted of prohibit Ing the making of domestic wines for home use. Such action on the part of the State can not be justified on any other theory than that the moderate use of intoxicat ting liquors as bever- age. or for remedial or culinary pu.- poses, is of itself morally wrong and hurtful to the community. I can not \ n A -1N A T, not find 1t so declared with authority, nor does my conscience so admonish me. It is urged to this objection that. even though You may be prevented by this section from making domestic wines for home consumption. there will be nothing in the Constitution to pre- vent you from ordering from another State all the wines you may desire. Why should citizen be forced to spend his money for that which nature has freely provided and placed at his doors? Why should the law force the various churches to order from whiskey dealers in other States all the wine they use in administering the sacrament? Surely they will not use for this holy purpose wines made in violation of law.
 Again 1t Is urged that the Legisla- ture will never pass any law placing any penalty upon making your own
  that they will not? It has been point ed out that such Is already the effect of our prohibition laws. It is strong ly believed that the submission of this amendment to the people was opposed by the more conservative prohibition Ists, even by MT. Brooks Lawrence him. seif-and 1t is certainly not what they want. It is true that I have heard uE.te a number of prohibitionists say ha a m- lnal offense to make domestic wine for family use, and that no man should be permitted to keep the smallest quan- tfty of whiskey in his home for any purpose but cannot believe that they are representative of the prohibition sentiment of the State. Granting that the Legislature will never place any penalty on the making Of wine Tor family use (and granting also that this same thing has not already been done), this feature of the law is still most obtectionable. The good citizen does not stand in awe of the pains and pen alties of the law-these are provided for those who will not obey the law because of their respect for it; and laws should be just, and conservative so that the people may respect them. It is by no means unreasonable to be- lieve, as 1t Is a reflection on the good citizenship of the State not to believe. that such prohibition in our organic law, even without the affixing of any penalty by the Legislature, would de- prive thousands of the citizens of the State of a privilege they. with much reason, believe to be theirs by natural right. The advocates of the amend ment assure us that they do not intend that the law if adopted shall be en- forced to this extreme. but at the same time they do not deny that 1t is hurt full to enact laws with no expectation of ever enforcing them; that 1t neces- sarily breeds contempt for law and en-