The Birmingham age-herald., 1910-12-21
.LATADY WRITES ON
 LIQUOR QUESTION Disagrees With Some Sug-
 gested Remedies SCORES THEIR FUTILITY Prominent Attorney Thinks That High License Is Not Solution for City.
 What Has Been Accomplished By the Present Laws
SCORES THEIR FUTILITY
To the Editor of The Age-Herald:

Liquor, or No Liquor." That Is the question; and, like the cock In the fable, upon my intrusion upon the question, let me say: "Gentlemen, let us not tread upon each other"
 It would needs be foreign either to an understanding of the subject, or to its orderly consideration. But, now that our legislature is about to assemble. and our Deceased Wifes Sisters Bill" is certain to come on for maceration, masti- cation, and, possibly, digestion. it were not amiss that, through the columns of your valuable journal. the views of lookers-on in Vienna should find express sion.
 For some years there have been upon inc statute books of Alabama certain ;aws known generally as prohibition laws" through the instrumentality and machinery of which one element of the citizenship of the state has been in the enjoyment of species of diversion which may be likened to bear-baiting, the dogs of the law being let loose and melted by them against the violators of these most notifications statutes. We have heard talk of the trial of these aforo- mentioned statutes, but they have not been tried, and in the very nature of things cannot be tried in the manner in which their so-called trial has been at- tempted.
 The pestiferous persistency of the vio- lators of the law has been tried and has not been found wanting; the conductivity of the human gullet for drink has been trio to Ha ble to almost any brand of liquor. From near beer" to half-and-half com posed of coca-cola and Jamacia ginger, which latter for It's superior quality of mounting to the brain and making it nimble and forgettive, surpasses even the most transcendental extravagancies of John Falstaff himself; and the righteous indignation of the unco guid has been tried. and found to be of the most TO- bustious and belligerent character with in the limits of becoming prudence.
 It is astounding that the genius of our laws should have been lost sight of by such large number of citizens. There is no proof of the goodness of a law in putting it to the touch through in strumentalties and process which should not be known, nor can the law be tried in such manner. To try man upon a warrant for an alleged violation of a statutory offense without the intervention of jury Is a trial of the judge; but it Is no trial of the law. for by such means 1t cannot be subjected to the broad common sense and humanity of those noblest in- stitutions of our system of laws, the grand and petit juries of the country. Tn these there is already at hand as safo referendum as human ingenuity can conceive, without taint of anarchy of which the modern idea of referendum and recall Is so redolent. It is a refer endum which would not be satisfactory to anarchy, the mutable and strong scented many being excluded from the consideration of matters referred, but 1t is the soundest referendum yet con- ceived.
 By statute of Edward III it is an in dictable offense for a man to wear shoes with points upon them exceeding three inches in length; but in all these cen turies it has been quite impossible in Eng land to find a grand jury which did not have three inches too much good. com mon sense to indict a man under this most wholesome, wise and salutary law. Here, now, is an instance of law which has been tried In the fire of common sense. and has been proven to be the very dross of legislation. It has been re- ferred to the bodies of the counties of England and has been repudiated.
 If these prohibition statutes in Alabama could have been submitted to the same test we would long since have been able to praise of the trial of these laws. but net only are the grand juries of the state brow-beaten and badgered by these same laws, but trial by jury has been discounted, notwithstanding the solemn injunctions of the constitution upon the Legislators to enact laws carrying into effect the provisions of the constitution, wherein 1t is most sententously expressed that the right of trail by jury shall re- main inviolate.
 It were no answer to say that the grand juries will not indlct for if they will not indct the accused, then their re- fusal is an indictment of the law, and 1t should stand condemned to everlasting redemption in the dark and backward abysm ftime. That statute of Edward III was so tested and so stands con demned, nor Is there a reader of this ar ticle who will not say that it was a most absurd law. He says so safely now for there is not fool in Christendom or Jewry who would wear a point upon the toe of his shoe three inches in length, and yet at the time that law was enacted the tooth-pick shoe was as great a mem ace to public safety and convenience as is the modern feminine hatpin, with which aforementioned extravaganza our last leg stature was invited to intermeddle, but 1t would have none of it. If the grand jrIies will not indict, condemn the law and not the jury; the one is an institution the other an experiment. Was it not possible in former times to indict man for not attending divine service? Was 1t not possible to indict him for nodding in church, and did not the grand juries re- spond most readily to the times?
 Those days are past, and a man may not only absent himself from church, but he may nod therein, or he may pass the holy edifice of stone without lifting his hat or depressing his eyes, and all with perfect impunity, for with the time the grand juries have changed and stat utes recognized such transgressions as indictable offenses could not stand the test of reference to present-day grand