The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1910-09-15

The State finds IL necessary, again
and again to interfere with what
somebody considers his lawful bust
ness"
If John Doe has in his possession
a quantity of Intoxicating liquor, pur-
chased legally for his own use, then |
the State has no more right to 1t than |
it has to Richard Roe's house and lot, !
giving it away without any legal au-
tbority, then the State may arrest him
and confiscate the liquor, just as il
might under certain conditions de-
clare Richard Roe's property nuts
apce to be abatsd.
The Journal fails to see where the
direct primary, the referendum, or the
recall has any more to do with the
liquor question than have vaccination,
Fletcherism, or the wearing of
"hobble" skirts. This paper does not
approve OF all the methods Of the
Anti-Saloon League, but It fails to see
where it has destroyed hundreds Of
millions of lawful property" There
Is wide difference between the de-
struction of property and the restric-
ton or prohibition of the sale of an
article which may be a menace to the
public welfare. The police power Of
a State is very far-reaching. The health
officials may deprive an individual of
that personal liberty which is the ba-
sis of all free government. 1t may
or the drinking of water from certain
sources. The State may compel deal
ers in goods of any kind to take out a
license. 1t may lay taxes upon them
that are very grievous to be borne. 1t
may say to a dealer in fireworks, for
instance, that his business is danger
Gus and that municipality may pro-
hibit the sale of such goods as mat
il ter OF public safety. ~slH .S1,
There are few evils greater or more
widespread than those caused by the
This is so generally recognized that
: few persons would attempt to argue
, that liquors should be sold in a man.
,ner as unrestrained as groceries
Z meats. or dry goods. Therefore the
laws provide for the most careful re.
strictions regarding the quality of the
, liquor, the hours when it may be sold
the persons who may buy it, the sur.
= roundings where it is served, and II
2 many States municipalities are giver
= the right to say whether liquor may
t or may not be sold.
S 1t is hardly to be supposed that oul
= correspondent will maintain that tn,
= LIQUOR traffic deserves the freedom
= from restraint granted to the mer
e chants who sell flour, cottons or coal
And if he admits that the traffic mus
/, be restricted to ensure the public safe
: ty will he deny that the legal right ex
:, lists to suppress it?
o The people of the United States. il
abolishing slavery, deprived the citi
b. zens of the South of property wort
, many millions of dollars. This was n
: vanton destruction OF property, bu
, VS. a step taken in response to tn
q W 1espread belief that the owner
q ship of human beings was
J. grea, moral wrong. The abuse c
q liquo" cannot be remedied as easil
. as sla cry was abolished. 1t is
:, question of a different nature, dealin
Il with different set of problems
. Liquor h.; it's legitimate uses. TIL
II demand fol 1t is still so great that n
general dec ee forbidding its manu-
facture and 'e can be enforced Tha
State has light to prohibit the sal
of liquor, if '1lund expedient, or t
y grant to it's municipalities that RICH
was settled by { 2 courts long ag,
- That any man has IN inherent righ
of which he may !. be deprived
process of law, to sell that whic
T. may induce the most orrible crimes
. menace the peace of tie communit.
destroy the home, and luin the ind
vidual, is doctrine too lAonstrous t
deserve serious considers ton.
There is an honest difference c
:, opinion regarding the best method c
- minimizing the terrible evils that gro'
out of intoXication. There is no SER
=. Gus question regarding the necessit
:. of regulating a traffic which, if lei
- unrestrained would speedily becom
- an unbearable nuisance and gray
danger to society.