The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1911-01-04
Prohibition by Stealth

Does the Vermont house Of repres-
entatives mean to do what its action
indicates in ordering to a third read
ing the bill giving women over 81
years OF age the right to vote on the
license question in town meeting?
This is one of the popgun bills whose
sole aim and purpose is to nullify the
local option law in this state. The
idea OF its promoter who probably
acts in behalf of Superintendent Fer
guson OF the Anti-Saloon league, is
that if women can vote, no city or
town in Vermont will go for license,
and that statewide pohibitionist mem
beTs of the house, who rallied in sup
pert OF the measure and advanced 1t
70 third reading Let ii be noted
that this same house had already kill
ed bill giving municipal suffrage to
tax-paying women. 1t promptly turns
about and indicates a willingness to
give all women the right to vote on
the license question.
Now we are not going into the mer-
its of this theme and discuss, pro
and con. the qualifications OF women
TO vote on this or any other issue. We
realize and appreciate as much as
anyone, the keen interest that womn
anyone, the keen interest that wom-
en- have in this particular question
the establishment OF rum selling in
their own town. Whenever 1t Is fair
y and squarely presented as an issue
and the state has opportunity to go
on record for or against It, we shall
take up that phase. But now and
today, different question presents It.
self
What warrant has the Vermont leg
slature for extending to women al
this time the right to vote on this
license question only? Has any con-
yeution. or party platform. or any re-
cognized body OF voters, ever called
for II? Have popular petitions de-
manded IL? Have committee hear
ngs indicated q preponderance OF ar
gument for it, Was the report OF
the Joint committee on temperance
favorable 70 IT, No, and no, and no.
and no. It is BADLY and palpably a
scheme to practically repeal the To-
cal option law, while preserving It's
form. II is a devious method OF ac-
compllshing a result that could not
otherwise be achieved II is paying
false with the party platforms and
false with the voters who now WELD
the ballot.
The local option law gained It's pop
llar standing because. back in 1903,
At referendum OF the voters, Il was
endorsed and adopted In general,
the law has justified its passage. SO
strongly entrenched is 1t now that the
legislature dare not repeal II, and
even resubmission OF the question
is not thought worth while. The last
republican state p'atform-though
less pronounced than some preceding
Ilt-declarcd that the principle OF To-
cal option ought not TO be disturbed
without recourse to the same means
by which II was adopted |. g., another
referendum. Yet In the face Of this
| the present legislature shows a dis
position to cut loose from all restraint
| md by introducing a voting strength
| not heretofore admitted TO suffrage
whose votes are sought because II Is
assumed they will be cast certain
way. and viii bring about n result
desired, personally, by perhaps a ma
lorlty Of the representatives, to viz
ually repeal a law that suits so large
4 percentage OF the present yotnl
strength that its actual repeal can
not be accomplished.
This undetermined method OF seour
ing prohibition by stealth deserves at
ientlon. Il is conceived In prejudice
and II Il carries will prove a regula
Pandora's box OF trouble. 1t Is rad
lcal In the extreme; a step that ough
not 10 be taken without a campaigl
before the people As an open an
avowed instance OF packing III
Jury" Il Is the rankest attempt yet I
take advantage of an opportunity !
order to secure what members indy
! idually desire-a verdict in advanc
Ito their nking-Randolph Herald an
Ncws.