Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1911-04-27
WILLIAM j. BRYAN
ON THE
Liquor License Question


have spoken thus at length upon the
subject of liquor drinking because the
regulation of the liquor traffic rests for
its justification upon the fact that in.
temperance is an evil. / recognize
that in the discussion of legislation there
is room for more honest difference of
opinion than there is as to the effect of
liquor drinking. / recognize that con-
scientious people differ as to how best
to control the liquor traffic, and shall
address my arguments to those who are
conscientiously seeking to reduce the
evils of intemperance to minimum.
| shall not spend any time arguing with
those who are making money directly
or indirectly out of the liquor business
not that 1t is impossible to reach such,
but because the time employed in con-
vincing man against his pecuniary in
terest can be more proftably employed
in converting those who have no, pecu-
MARY interest to blind them. We ex-
clude from-th jury those who have a
pecuniary interest in the result of the
trial because we recognize mans bias
in favor Of that which is pecuniarily
profitable to him. In every attempt to
protect society from the evils of intern
peranee we can expect the active OPP
position of the brewers, the distillers,
the wholesale liquor dealers, the retail
liquor dealers and those who
feel that they are engaged in allied
indus ries, and the friends Of temper
ance can not ignore the fact that in
recent years the liquor interests have
assumed an organized form and are
National in theie operations.
| regard drinking in the home,
while would advise against it, as
resting upon a different basis from
drinking in the saloon The man who
drinks at home has the hom- influence
to restrain him, while this is absent at
the saloon. In the home, too, he is
protected from the temptation that
comes from the treating habit.
The brewery is not charitable in
stitution. 1t is not operated for the
benefit of the public. It does not want
the saloon as an educational Institution;
it does. not offer it as q moral center.
It wants It as a means of selling liquor,
and until the breweries become the
champions of prohibition we need not
pay any stteDtion to the argument that
more liquor is sold without the saloons
than with them.
A great deal is said now about the
business of this city being injured by
the closing of the saloons. 1t is strange
that anyone can be deceived by an ar
gument so transparently false. Is it
possible that business is improved by
the expenditure of money for liquor
that ought to be spent for food and
clothing? Can a city BE- helped in a
business way by the encouragement of
habit that weakens theAstrength Of
its people. lowers their intellectual
activity and undermines their morals?
Those engaged in the liquor traits, like
all others who hive by injuring society,
must rely upon false aT9Aaments for the
support of their cause.
X X
This question. like every other great
question, is in It's last analysis a ques-
tim Of ethics, question which the
heart must decide.
They may bring forth all the gold
washed promises that the saloons can
offer; let them pile up their tinsel
pledges until the confi0eace game il
PLAYED to It's limit. and they can be an
swerad With The Inquiry proDounded BY
Him who sstpeke IS never nhanspnke. 2
What shall It profit man if be shah
gain TIE whole world and lose bis 0Nn
So1l