The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-01-26
LEGISLATIVE COMMENT
BY LEWIS Fl. MACHEN
STATE. WIDE PROHIBITlON-II.

J Having traced the recent LEGISLATION
Of this State regarding the question OF
alcoholic liquor. 1t may be interesting
TO group some of the arguments for
and against the passage of the State
woe prohibition referendum measure
which arc just now being heard In and
/ around the halls of the Legislature.
TO begin with. there Is tho fupda-
mental cleavage betwoen the persons.
firms and corporations engaged In tho
liquor business who do not wish to
run tho risk of seeing their business
and business property swept away or
materially damaged, on the one hand.
and the thorougagoing enemies of
Wnat they call the rum demon. on the
other' VINO desire TO see the traffic in
sp''''uouS beverages prohibited
throughout the Union and their manu-
facture practically broken up Natur-
ally there is little or no common
srounu upon which these two forces
can be pcaccably assembled
Besides these extremes arc those who
ABSTAIN from the use OF liquor them
selves and TO whom the question as
Sunes no particularly personal form:
thosc VINO use 1t occasionally and in
moderation. and. while dcplorins the
eNcesses of their weaker brethren. con-
siaef me evils attributed to the saloon
rs exceptional; and those who habltually
H, al
VINO would regret to know there was
danger of Its being made dincult or
expensive to obtain. There are also
many VINO are sincerely opposed TO
'h' liquor traffic, who would like to
see IT abolished. but who think prohI-
pition is not the best way TO reach the
evils complained Of Others while
having no great faith in the efficacy
oil prohibition, are yet willing that the
experiment should he tried
10 some extent the extremes of
poth sides arc represented in the mem
pcrshlp OF the Legislature. While II
cannot be said that all of lite nomb crs
are total ahstaincrs, ii Is a very tenn
pcratc body. taken as whole In
tact OF late years IL has been IL most
| exceptional thing that any mcmh.r of
either house has allowed sliouor to in
! tcrlere with the performance. OF his
! legislative duties. The position Of the
| various members, therefore. lie in great
measure political rather than a pcr-
S"hal one The demands of the state.
tempered by the particular conditions
I IN mis- home district. are likely IN de
! ternire his action
! lAcso arc the conditions hoti inside
| ana out OF the Legislature with which
.he advocates of both Sides have to
! deal ~
mo friends OF the referendum de- :
| .''' tH"l inc people wish an oppor-
4, Unity TO vote upon the question nnd
l"at IL would not be Democratic 10
oenS them that privilege The other
s'dc reply that tho people OF tho sew
era communities OF the State already
nave the opportunity 10 determine tho
question for themselves: that ono nj
me chieSest OF Democratic tenets Is
iocai self-Fovernmcnt. and tina, y
: would be wrong for a prohibition ma
| 1OrltN
iermine the policy and the practice -,
inc other end In this matter.
me friends OF the measure rotor,
mat thH State Is n unit. and has righ,
10 dersrmi0c uniform policy upor
THIS question. Tho ether side answer.
th"i prohibition is a policy which I!
Incapable or being enforced over tn,
STATE as n whole especially In thos,
sections where public opinion Ia favor
hbfs TO the use or liquor. and wher,
would be bought and used by whole
sac, II 1t could not ne obtained ~ rc
> !