The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-03-23
SPLAIN DENOUNCES LIMITATION BILL
 AS CONFISCATORY
Continued from Page 3.)

a. limitation law such as IS under QlS- cussion, and in view of the further fact that 8 reduction in the mum Der of drinking places effects no reduc- tion of drinking itself, where Is the Justification in making so radical change in our existing excise system as your committee is asked to recom- mend? It is true we are told that a limitation law of this character will bring a better class of men into the saloon business, but the assertion is a wholly gratuitous one. The men engaged in the liquor business in Mas aachusetts, where there is lini- tation law of the kind proposed. are in no respect better than the men en- gagged in the business in Connecticut and Rhode Island where no such linn itation is in force. l have had oc- casion during the past half dozen years to make pretty regular visits to the leading cities of Connecticut, Mas speak advisedly when l say that for intelligence, industry, integrity, res pectability and good citizenship the liquor dealers of Connecticut are quite the peers of those in Massachu- sets. There is nothing to be gain ed in any way that will reflect credit on this commonwealth of Connecti- cut through the passage Of l1m1ta- ton law like that under discussion: there is very much that will cast dis credit on the honesty and sense of justice that have won for it the proud title of "the' land of steady habits by making the state confiscator or vested rights and properties that have been built up under the sanction Of the law For you can't reduce the number of saloons as this limitation law would do without driving num- Der of men out of business and turn ing them and their families adr1ft into new and unaccustomed fields or existence and wrecking the accumu- 1ation of years of industry and toll. You can't reduce the number of sa- looms without hitting in vital spots the many allied industries that find in the saloons the whole or greater field for their output.
 The cigar trade, the glass blowing industries, the bar-fxture factories, the plum ping business, the harness and wagon-making establishments anu be mentioned. the capital and labor engaged in which find a large meas ure of their revenues in the saloons, are all bound to suffer if the number of drinking places is reduced to the extent that this proposed limitation law would reduce them. A chain Is no stronger than it's links, and if in putting a large number of drinking places out of existence one of the strongest links that make up this great chain of allied industries is mashed, the inevitable result must gagged in these industries and their families of their accustomed means of livelihood. As I look on these men who are advocating this limita- ton measure I can see none that I would think capable of robbing his neighbours henroost, and yet they would unblushingly confscate the property, of a large number of liquor dealers and glory in their work as an oblation on the altars of religion. Out upon such religion, I say! It was the same brand of religious zealotry that burned the Salem witches at the stake, that sent Roger Williams out of Massachusetts to start a brewery in Rhode Island, that justified the horrors of the Spanish inquisition! It is such religion, and the preaching and practice of it, that causes the la ment we so often hear from denom- national conferences of a falling off of interest in the pews, for men who sit in the pews can hardly be expect ed to view with enthusiasm a religion many of the shining lights of which show such an utter disregard of the gentle Nazarene's teaching, Thou and the preaching and practice of it, that may eventually lead to retalia- tion against those who promulgate it and cause the enactment of laws that will be as offensive to them as the ones they advocate are to the major ity of the people of Connecticut; for if it Is right to make laws that would prevent all men from drinking where the prohibitionists are in the saddle, it must be equally right to make laws that would force all men to drink where the anti-prohibitionists hold the whip. And what an inspiring # ha in bn of c11ot to a piece of sumptuary legislation, to see our friend Orr holding the cup to his brother Spooner's lips!
 And now in conclusion let me say: It has often been remarked. in public assemblies where the drink problem necticut's present excise system is the most admirable and the best in Amer ica. Then why not let it alone. even at the expense of interfering with the occupation of those who seem to have built up a somewhat profitable trade in trying to SOW their prohibition seed on the sterile soil of Connecticut. A unanimously adverse report from your committee would be a certificate 10 the world that this good old land of steady habits is not yet ready to be cajoled into the acceptance of a pol icy that would be in effect a flat -e- pudiation of the divine injunction: Thou Shalt Not Steal!'
 The Rev. pr. Phillips for the Church Federation of New Haven called attention to the fact that the opponents of the bills are the paid attorneys of the liquor interests. Fla voring the legislature are the best people of the state who demand some relief from these conditions At a former hearing the church represen- tatives were accused of being unfa- miIiar with the liquor laws. Ad- hitting that they did not know all the intricacies of the liquor legisla- ton they do know what the people want. The only recompense that the people get from these unpleasant conditions is the small percentage from the license fees. Two years ago the people wanted a limitation law.
 There was rejoicing when the law limiting the saloons to one in 800 was passed, but the law was so adroitlv drawn or so clunlsily drawn that the statute is not worth the paper that it is written on. It does prohibit the issue of new licenses, but the com missioners go right along reissuing old licenses. He denied that the temper ance men contemplated any invas sion of property rights. This is a fallacy that is beneath contempt Dr. Phf,- lips painted the conditions in New Haven in a manner that did not make claimed that the object of the cam paign is to put the saloons on their good behaviour. There are 4O1 sa- looms in New Haven now
 Winslow Russell representing the Federated Young Peoples Societies of Hartford argued for the bill. He rep resented the Connecticut Christian