Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1911-02-07
THE UNAVOIDABLE
4 PRINCIPLE OF PROHIBITION
By Bishop w. 4. Gambler

II 10 interesting to note how all the
theories proposed for the control of the
trafick in intoxicating liquors rest in
their final analysis on the principle Of
prohibition. Men may say that they are
opposed TO the principle of prohibition,
but when they undertake to suggest some
more desirable system they are forced to
accept the principle which they profess
to reject.
No one openly prosposes to repeal the
law fprbidding the sale of intoxicants to
minors; to that all parties outwardly
agree. But the law on this subject in
wolves the principle OF prohibition. II the
civil authority may prohibit the sale of
liquors to one class of persons, It may ex-
tend the prohibition to all classes provid-
ed such course is judged to be best for
society.
The prohibition of the sale Of liquors on
the Sabbath and on days OF elections is
justified by all thinking people in this
section Of the country. But II the state
may prohibit the sale OF liquors on one
day 1t may prohibit such traflck on all
days.
The license system itself rests on the
all persons who have not obtained IL
cense from engaging in the traffick.
No one now has the hardwood to affirm
that the liquor business can be dealt with
in the sama manner as other branches
Of trade, or that 1t ought to be 80 treat
ed. Men Of ali shades Of opinion are
forced to admit that 1t so affects the
peace and good order Of the community
that il must be put Under restraints not
laid upon other forms Of merchandise.
Few are found to defend the liquor traf-
1ck; 1t is recognized as an unQuestionable
evil. The only question: Jon which men
divide in public discussion Is the question
OF how to reduce to a minimum the evils
which issue from the sale of intoxicants.
To this question a great variety of an
swers are offered, but as has been said,
all these answers rest in their last an
alysis upon the principle Of prohibition.
Recently the State or Alabama elected a
governor who violently opposed the prohi-
hibition law of his state, In his Inaugural
address he denounced the prohibition law
the strongest terms. But in the cNurse
Of his remarks he was forced TO accept
the prohibition principle, He Is lsporteJ
TO have said in connection with recon-
mendation for an excise commission:
I'm my opinion nearly all the evils of
modern intemperanoe have come from
drinking cheap, debased and adulteruted
articles of alcoholic beverages. We should,
therefore. by proper provisions, limit the
sale to those distilled and fermentei bev-
erages which are recognized by leading
chemists and experts as least injurious to
the puhIc health we should prohibit
the sale, under whatever name they may
be offered. OF all spirits which are COM
pounded wholly or in part Of aicohol,
either with or without added eoloring or
iavoring matter; or which are produced
In any other way than by the legitimate
methods of distillation and ageing as re-
CURED by the most advanced pure food
laws
Stripped Of all ambiguous and euphemis-
tic terms this language means that the
Governor of Alabama thinks the state
should permit the sale OF lgood" liqours
and prohibit the sale of bad liquors.
But will His Excellency tell US who - to
be the Judge of what liqours are good and
what are bad7 VIII one Of the duties Of
his excise commission be to sample the
liquors sold in the state, and after tasting
to say which Is good and which is bad
Or, will that function be exercised by the
chief executive of the stateg
At last Ii comes to this that even the
governor of Alabama admits that there
are liquors which are bad enough to he
He then is compelled TO accept the prtn-
oiple OF prohibition, and the only ques-
tIon which he regards as open to dis
cussion Is one that rests solely on the
quality of the liquors sold.
But are there any liquors good enough
to escape the principle Of prohibitiong
DO not all liquors intoxicate? And does
not intoxieation produce crime, pauper'
ism, and disease, whether It be produced
/, 80 5r1fA y
hiRglfng over the quality OF the liquor
consumed seems to be the merest trihing
with a great and appalling evil The
hest liquor is had enough to be pro-
hibited. II can not be denied that some
liquors are worse than others, but none
are rood enough for the state to allow
them to be sold in the open market as
beverages TO this conclusion most OF
the American people are coming, and II
carries with It some form OF pfohinltlon
as it's logical consequence. The very
nature Of all intoxicants is such that IT
forces the principle Of prohibition to the
front until 1t becomes an unavoidable
principle Unless, therefore, men suffer
some deterioration In moral character
or become utterly blind In Judgment. the
cause of prohibition must go forward
its advances is inevitable.
Particular statutes may contain OBJ
jectionable features which may lead TO
their amendment, or to their repeal In
some instances; but the principle Of pro-
hibition will not on that account be
Abandoned Statutes in themselves
unobjectionable may be brought Into
more or less disrepute N some communi-
ties by the inndellty of the executives
of the law to their oaths Of officei but
sooner or later the statutes Will be vim
dioated and the faithless ofieials will be