Devils Lake weekly world. (Devils Lake, N.D.) 1911-1914, 1911-09-29
ing into the form of constitutional
amendment, so that there would be no


amendment, so that there would be no
possibility of any Legislature repeating
prohibition without first submitting the
question to a referendum vote of all
legal voters of the state. The original
generation of voters who put prohibi-
tion into effect in Maine must nearly
all be i'll the graveyard now. Two or
three new generations Of voters have
grown up free from the temptations of
the legal saloon. They have enjoyed
all the advantages and benefits which
can flow from 60 years steady applica-
tion of prohibition, and there is con
elusive evidence in the vote that the
voters think less and less of the effects
produced by the law. The majority in
favor of prohibition in Maine evidently
disappeared according to the vote just
registered That result comes Oh the
heels of most strenuous campaign in
which all the political and religious
forces back of prohibition have used
their utmost effort in time and money
to prevent prohibition being voted cut
Of the constitution.
1t would seem that a good thing, be-
ing gwen 60 years in which to take
roo, and grow, under the protection of
the churchs and the ruling party in pol
tiles in the state of Maine. ought to
show more vitality than prohibition
does in Maine. It is evidently less
sturdy than it was half century ago,
and one must be curious IT, know why.
OF conr>., Il vast variety OF excuses
and explanations will be instantly
forthcoming to explain the progress
of prohibition backward, like crab,
in the state Of Maine-and in Vermont
also where a similar vote resulted in
the substitution of local option for pro-
hihition after so wears experience of
some of the chief reasons why prohibit
ton has been in the past found to T..
failure lie on the surface.
The WorlS mas NJ lesra to- - into
An extended argument IN h. .lem"ri,s
Of prohibition but We would hazard the
guess lat the mo-. fatal weakness Of
prrn,hi'.on is that IL does no, prohibit.
1t travels on false prctcnscs. 1t does
net even diminish the amount OF li9lor
consumed in state.
Thcre is considerable argument at
present among the editors of the state
as to whether or not prohibition does
not actually increase the consumption
of liquor.
At any rate. with half the states in
the union under prohibition laws, the
United States internal revenue figures
show that more and more whiskey and
beer is manufactured and sold every
year, and consumed by somebody some
where. There is much evidence to sup
port the contention of opponents of
prohibition that it not only does not
prohibit, but increases alcoholic con-
sumption. If this be true we need not
| look further for its failure to justify
itself. If it does not do the thing It's
very name assumes to be its function
and effect, then the loss of revenue it
entails to the taxpayers, the increased
taxes incurred by endless litigation. the
repugnance most people feel to infr;ns-
ment on personal liberty of men to cat
and drink what they please. being ans
werable alone to society for abuse of
this liberty injurious to others, the law
breaking and injury to respect Cor law
that follows prohihition-all these
| things, evil in themselves. can no, be
paid with calmness as the price If Il
law that does not do what it pretends
to do, and is believed by many to OPP
crate in an exactly opposite way. 1t
is the failure of prohibition to prohibit,
even in any appreciate degree. that
makes the states which have tried it
longest wish to throw it aside as a
remedy for the evils of intempcrarce,