The Republican journal., 1912-06-13
Prohibition and Divorce.

L
it not remarkable how certain of the
press cling to their old hostility to the
prohibitory law? From their attitude it
would seem to be the only law upon the
statute book that has not one phase OF
feature to commend it. 1t is bad, and
wholly bad. Now, all thoughtful men,
are agreed that the best way to get rid
of bad law is to enforce it, and when
the people see it's actual working, if it is
not satisfactory, they will soon demand
its repeal. Now let the administration
demand that every rumseller be sent to
Jail, as every law in regard to him on the
statute book demands, and see what will
be the result. They, at least for sea-
son, will not sell any more. If a new
crop appears, serve them the same, and
if after a year of this policy there is no
improvement, it will then be in order to
consider the repeal of the law.
realize that the enforcement of the
law would work great hardship to the
administration, for so many of its sup
porters would be in Jail that it would
largely cut into its vote at the next cleo
ton. The enforcement of the law will
injure none but the persistent criminal
class, and if any of our good people de-
sire to sympathize with, and uphold
them, why of course they have a right to
choose their friends. But, imperfectly
as this law has been enforced it has
proved far more satisfactory than the
laws in any of the license States. Sta
tistics of the Interstate Commerce Com
mission show that the amount of liquor
brought into this State is but one eigh-
teenth as much per capita as it is in
license territory. In comparison with
Massachusetts in the past SO years,
Maine has far outstripped her in pro-
portionate increase in wealth, in wages
paid to labor, in ownership of houses,
while in increased criminality, pau
perism, insanity and deaths from alco-
holism, Massachusetts is far in the lead,
and we do not envy her the position.
But one argun ent lately resurrected
by the so-called rum subsidized press"
is that of increased divorces in this
State, due to intoxication. Of course we
have to look to the press for those facts,
for few of US can give the time or have
the opportunity to investigate each ques-
ton, and so are apt to take them as we
read them in the news of the day, as we
do the rest of the news. The govern
ment has made an exhaustive examina-
ton of the question of divorce in every
State from 1867 to 1906, showing the
cause of action in every case during the
40 years. Several of the prominent Ii
cense States, like New York, New Jer-
sey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and others
do not recognize drunkenness as a cause
for divorce; if they did, it would be very
easy for large part of the wives to get
divorce, for most of the men drink.
Taking the 40 years covered by the in
vestigation and dividing it into 5 year
periods, l find that in the years from
1867 to 1871 for each divorce granted in
this State for drunkenness as direct or
indirect cause, there were not quite four
cases granted for the same cause in the
year period from 1901 to 1906. Or in
other words there were not quite four
times as many divorces for intemperance
in the last period as there We're in the
first, while in the license States of Ar
kansas, Minnesota and Tennessee there
were II times as many; in Mississippi
as many; in Florida % times as many; in
Alabama 81 times; Colorado "a times;
Massachusetts 81 times, and in Nebraska
A times as many in the last period as
there were in the first. And in one State
the increase was 1913 times. Thus we
see that while Maine divorces for drunk
enness increased less than 4 times, in
good old license Massachusetts they in
creased 81 times; so if prohibition Stays
it's thousands, license Stays its tens of
thousands. The authorities say that in
the license States where drunkenness is
not ground for divorce, it is, in fact, the
underlying cause in majority of cases.
While those who uphold the liquor
traffic and point to Massachusetts as an
example for us to follow, statistics and
court records show that the license sys-
TEN strikes the home blow ten times as
severe as we feel it here in Maine, and
in some States it strikes it 100 times as
severe.
What confidence can we have in the
press when set of hired editors place
such baseless arguments before its read
ers; uphold traffic that saddens every
home it enters, blights every character
it touches, and degrades every communi-
ty it invades! The curse of God is upon
it, whitening wasting curse; it shall
never leave it until ii is banished from
every h inlet in our nation, and the name
of every one of it's advocates is sunk in
oblivion. C. E. SMITH.
Thorndike.
E. NJ. G. S.
III ct