Martinsburg statesman-democrat. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1906-1921, 1909-12-17

Liquor QUESTION Ar wAsHrNeroN

LIQUOR QUESTION AT WASHINGTON.
The federal congress must sooner or
later take netice Of the activity Of the
liquor interests ard their attempt to
coItrol the action Of the federal gov
eminent. They have entered national
politics, and will polute every thing
that they touch until they are driven
out. We have already seen democratic
congressman dragged into the republic
can camp by these interests, when Z
eight was being made over the ru les Of
the house for there Ii no question Of
the activity Of the liquor interests in
supporting CaDnonism. Federal H.
censes are now issucd to those who de-
sire to sell liquor in territory in which
local licenses are denied, and the brew
ers and distillers are still using inter-
state commerce to nullify the laws Of
the various states. Surrey there can be
excuse for the issue OF fedora, H.
ceEses to liquor dealers IN territory
where the local authorities have pro-
hibited the sale Of liquor. The charge
for federal license is $25 per year, and
when federal license is issued upon
the payment Of this sum the federal
government either obtains the money
without consideration or 1T enters into
partnership with the violater Of the
law.
Three objections have been made to
the proposition that the federal gov
eminent should refuse to issue licenses
in dry territory, namely, First, that
taxes should be uniform and that the
government can not, therefore, collect
q license tax in one community and
refuse to collect such tax in another;
Second, that the federal government
could not prosecute a pf7son for SELL
ing without license If fssttused 10
issue a license; aud third, that the
issue of federal license Is useful in
that 1t enables the local authorities to
ascertain from the record who are en-
gagged IN The traffic. These three OBJ
jections might be met by law reduc-
ing the license to 81, and providing
that notice Of the issue Of such licenss
be posted INN ediateiy In the postofYice
10 the town IN which the licensee re-
sides and requireing publication Of
notice in local newspaper. The 81
would not more than cover the cost of
issuing and recording the licen se and
posting the notice, and such law
would take the government out Of
partnership with the law breakers.
| By what logic can one justify the
action Of the federal government in
permitting interstate commerce TO be
used to nuIlify state regulation OF the
| liquor traffic? If state can be trusted
to protect property and to prescribe
| rules for the descent of estates, can 1t
| not be entrusted with the power to
regulate the sale and use Of liquor? If
the state can be entrusted with the
enactment aud enforcement OF Grim
inal laws, even to The exacting OF the
death penalty, can It not be entrusted
with the power 10 control the liquor
traffic? IL can, of course, be taken for
granted that the liquor interests will
oppose any legislation which has for
its object the protection of society from
the evils of intemperance, and they
will, as they have in the past, threat
en- any party which refuses TO bow
down to the god which they have set
up, but the democratic party can bct-
ter afford to invite their opposition than
groveI in the dust to secure their ap-
proval.-Commoner.