The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1910-05-05

our people that great prosperity and
happiness they now so much enjoy.
If it may be urged that l am a
prejudiced witness because primarily
favorable to the principle, it cannot be
urged that am not competent to tes-
tify, and / will therefore introduce as
| corroborating witnesses a list of mer-
chants and business men of our city,
who, though very much opposed to
prohibition when first adopted, now
speak in no uncertain tone it's praise,
purely from business standpoint.
! Notice what some of them say:
| o. J. deLendrecie, merchant (prob-
| ably the largest in the state): 81 much
prefer the prohibitory system"
Alexander Stern, clothier and large
owner of rental property: From the
standpoint of the landlord, the prohib-
tory system is far superior"
Hubert Harrington, hardware: "I
will do everything in my power to
prevent the return Of the saloon to our
city and state"
]. B. Folsom, real estate: "Prohibi-
ton has tendency to increase the
value of property by inducing the best
class of citizens Of other states to
come here"
w. C. Resser, city attorney: II say
prohibition by all means"
Peter Elliott, hotel owner and may
orr ct is not necessary to keep a
| bar to make success of the hotel
business. Our business men generally
do not want the return of the saloon"
James Kennedy, contractor, formerly
in the hotel business, present state
| senator and national committeeman of
republican party: mo man in the
state would fight the return OF the
saloon in any guise stronger than IL
These statements could be multiplied
many fold. In discussing this ques-
ton, 1t ought not to be forgotten that
there are two kinds of prohibitionists:
First, those who, though not total abb
stainers personally, have become tired
of the domination OF the saloon as it
now exists, and who believe that
drinking, if at all, should be done at
the home or office; second, those total
abstainers who believe that by pass
ing prohibitory laws the evils OF the
saloon will be diminished and drinking
liquor as beverage be materially de-
creased.
1t will be observed that nowhere does
our law attempt to prohibit drinking,
nor does it prevent the delivery of
liquor except as sale or it's evasion
by gift; while the license system, of
course, permits the sale publicly in
places specially prepared for the busi-
ness. To compare the workings OF the
two systems, therefore, some standard
should be raised by which the two
can be measured. suggest the fol-
lowing: That system of dealing with
the liquor traffic is the best which.
First, reduces the sale and use of
intoxicating liquors to the minimum.
Second, which relieves the state in
the largest degree from all those bur-
dens which fall upon us by the over
indulgence in intoxicating liquors, such
as the building of hospitals, aims
houses, penitentiaries, JaiIs and gener-
ally caring for the poor.
Third, which creates in, the commun-
ity a desire for better and higher con-
ditions of civic life.
Measured by some such test, the
license system has been weighed and
II und wanting, while the prohibitory
method has not only demonstrated its
ST. eriority, but continues to grow In
popularity ana eIlCIency- me promo
tory system, too, has proven ~the sa-
loonkeeper's friend. 1t has driven him
out Of a disreputahle business and Civ
en- him an opportunity to make good
in other callings Many of our most
prominent, wealthy and trusted BUSH
ness men were formerly saloonkeepers.
Where has the license system any such
record to its credit?
If prohibition does not always pre-
vent the violation of law 1t has ush-
cred in brighter day for the people
OF the state, who, after twenty years
experience under 1t, do not care to
again make lawful the sale OF liquor
as a beverage.
Don't