The Brattleboro reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1907-1912, 1910-12-30
Prohibi,ion BY Stealth.



Doss the, NsunoHt hoase II FspFeenla
ltnns naran Ia do n hat iis action Indicates
IN onisrns 10 ! third Tsadlng tbs but giy
ing aolnen over II yeaHs al ase the nghl
Ito vote on the heense question IA ionn
noeiings This is 0ne al tho I'opgin hlll'
WHOSE sole aim and pnrpese V Ia nnllli
the local option Law N this state. Tbs
idea al he promoter, n ha probably aris IN
behalf of Superintendent Ferguson II tho
| AnliaSal00n lragAlr - that II Women can
Vote, no city az town IN Vermont vail 80
iiar liUrnse, aud that state wide pfohlhl
ton viii b. the inevitable result This,
ltoo, u the motive behlnd the rrahlhliion'
lsi memlcrs al the house Who rallied 10
support Of the measure aud advanced u "a
f lhird naiing. Let u he noted that this
same house had alwady killed a ball giving
municipal suffrage 90 taN.paying women,
/ II promptly turns about and Indicates 4
willingness 10 give all women the right 20
vote on the hcrnse question.
Now we ate not going into the merits
81 this theme and discuss, pro and con,
the qualifications II women 90 vote ON
ihis or any other issne, We realize aud
appreciate, a. murh a. anyone, the keen
mterrst that women have in this pariicm
lar question the establishment al rum
selling N their own town. Whenever Il b.
fairly and squartly presented A. an issue
aud the state has opportunity "a 60 on
r,o0rd iur 90 against u, Ne shall take NJ
that phase. But NOW and to-day, a diilCt
cni question presents iiscll.
What warrant has the Vermont legisla
tufc ior extending "a women az ill. time
the right 10 vote on tins LICENSE question
onlyt llas any convention. or party plat
form. o. any recognized body Oi voters,
ever called ior ns Have popular petitions
demanded il! Have committee hearings
Indicated a prrpondrranoe Of argument for
its Mas the rrpnti ol the joint commit.
Ice "a Temperance favorable "a ~ No,
and no aud NO. aud no. II + badly and
mlrRhy 4 scheme 10 practically repeal
the local option law, while preserving lls
form II ]. a devious method ol accom-.
plishing I result that could not otherwise
BE- achieved. II y playing false with the
party platforms aud false with the yoteTs
who now WELD the ballot
The loaM option law gained lts popular
standing because, back ia 1909, nc a refer
endum OF the voter, b WIS endorsed and
adopted IN general, he law has iusii
i II now that the legislature dare not re
peal Il, and even a rcsuhmissIon OF the
question Is not thought worth while The
last republican state platform though
les. pronounced than some preceding IT,
declared that the principle Of local option
ought not 90 be- disturbed without re-
course 10 the same means by which Il was
adopted i e.. another referendum Vet
IN the face OF this the present legislature
shows a disposition 10 cut loose fr1m ~
restraint and by introducing a voting
strength not heretofore admitted 20 sui
frugc whose votes are sought because Il
is assumed they will be east a certain
way, and viii bring about q result desired,
personally. by perhaps a majority q the
TO virtually rcpeaI law
that suits 50 large a percentage of the
present voting strength that is actual re-
peal cannot be accomplished
This uuderhanded method Of securing
prohibition by stealth deserves attention. 4
II Is conceived in prejudice, and II il ear. I
rics will prove a regular Pandora's box of
trouble II is radical in the extreme;
step that Ought not to be taken without .
campaign before the people. As an open .
md ayowed instance OF packing the Jury
/ i the rinkest attempt vet to take al
vantage Of an opportunity in order 70 -
,ure what members individually desire-a
verdict in advance to their liking.