The Republican journal., 1911-07-27

| will not repeal the prohlbltOry law as
long as it is doing all that can be hui
manly accomplished.
"Think of the asininity of a man com
ing into our State, and after week, or
a month or several months of investiga-
ton discovering that liquor can be bought
in Maine! He steps back into his State
and spreads the report broadcast that
liquor is being sold in prohibition Maine;
that the law does not prohibit.
Il am frank to say that the law is not
always enforced as vigorously as it
should be. 1t is being enforced less
vigorously now than it ought to be.
| (Applause). l am told that the powers
are planning to give Maine such radical
enforcement that it will drive many to
voting for the laws repeal. They are
hesitating about administering the dose
of medicine, but they can't do it any too
soon or any too thoroughly to suit me. :"
The remainder of Mr.. Littlefield's
speech was comparison of prohibition
Maine with license Massachusetts,, with
what result will be seen from the follow
ing stenographic report.
The assertion that men get drunk as
often in Maine as in Massachusetts, and
that if the prosperity of a community
is rightly measured by its increase Of
wealth and population, then Maine ranks
as one of the least prosperous of all the
! States" while somewhat guarded and
circumscribed in its scope is still fair
| illustration of the hasty and lll-considered
congratulations frequently met with in
j the discussion of this subject by the un-
informed l think Maine can success
fully stand the test laid down.
Inasmuch as Massachusetts has been
referred to by way of comparison, and
as she is popularity understood to be at
! least fair representative of develop
ment in the line of moral, social, and
material welfare, thus giving an exact
ing standard, / will confne myself to
that State for comparisons. All of the
statistics are from the United States
census, where they can be easily verified.
They have the advantage of being dis
same basis. The United States during
the last decade increased in population
POT per cent, Massachusetts 25.3 per
cent and Maine 5 per cent. The per-
centage of increase in Massachusetts
was little less than in the preceding
decade, Names about three times as
much, 5 per cent against 1.9 per cent
1t is very pregnant fact in this connec-
ton that, while Names population If
1900 was only 694, 466, there were Their
living in other States PIG, 551 persons
who were born in Maine. 1t is true that
Massachusetts made great progress, but
Maine furnished for her SO, and re
ceived in return only Is, 900, giving from
her small population more than six times
as many as she received. In any fail
analysis Names vital contribution Of
some of her most valuable material t.
her sister States must be cons .dered
and when given its due weight it will
clearly appear that she is by no mean:
lone of the least prosperous of all the
States from the standpoint of popula
ton.
Whether or not a community ha:
prospered during given period, clearly
depends upon the accumulation Of wealth
per capita, and its increase or decrease
and there Maine easily outstrips Massa
chusetts, as her per capita wealth Il
1850 was S210, while in 1900 it was 1892
an increase of 4 IL times. Massachu
sets had per capita in 1850 s577, and il
1900 1888, an increase Of only 2 A.
times.
This is the period covered by the Main,
law Moreover from 1880 to 1902 Main
has decreased her Indebtedness per capt.;
so, and Massachusetts has increase
| hers by the same amount. The town 0
Raymond. Me-, is relatively typical o
the States material development. Prio
to 1851, with l, 1872 souls, with valua
, ton of about $3.50, 900, per capita 1926
it is estimated from actual sales take
: from old account books that the value 0
liquor consumed in every period Of /
: years was more than the entire valua
ton of the town. Today no liquor ia.
is paid in the town; and, while the popu
lation has decreased to 1913, the valua
ton has increased to S21S, 072, or S26
per capita, doubling in per capita wealth
> The population of Massachusetts in 1870
, was 2, 905, 346. in round numbers fou
times that of Maine, and in the analyst
to follow, in order to stand on leve
with Maine, that proportion should b
maintained.
) This marked relative increase of wealt
in excess of Massachusetts is emphasiz
ed when attention is called to the fac
that this increase was made under ad
verse conditions 1t is well-know
fact that farming in New England, an
especially in Maine, where the disad
vantages are probably the greatest, i
not an occupation marked by rapi
money-making, however much Their
may be to commend it from other point
of view. In Maine in 1900 there wer
SO, 299 farms, with an acreage of 6,279,
946, and a valuation, with land improve
ments and buildings, of $96, SOP, $50, wit
an annual product of SAP, 298, PA, or a
average of 81, l21 farm. While unat
tractive for large profits, farming woul
seem to be twice as profitable in Massa
chusetts. If Massachusetts had pro
portionate number of farms, instead o
37,715 there would be about 246, 900.
: Maine has males 10 years of age ant
over engaged in farming 1871, NOR
than 10 per cent of her population, AM
Massachusetts only 1862, little NOR
than per cent of her population, leav
ing a much larger percentage free il
Massachusetts, for other and more gain
full occupations Massachusetts, not onl,
has fewer persons engaged in the les
profitable occupation, but those who ar
engaged therein are making create
, profit, giving her decided advantage
Manufacturing enterprises are gener
ally accepted as the desirable avenue
through which wealth can be accumu
lated and here the advantage is decided
ly with Massachusetts,, as she had in 100
an investment of capital in manufac
; turing of 1923, 264, 2S7, with wage earn
ers numbering 497, 48S, and an annua