Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-03-21

| T. L. of every state was represented
| by white ribbon officials OF course,
| the other temperance organizations
| were well represented also All these
| men and women pleaded in behalf of
| the measure which would best protect
| the interests of the home from the
| homes greatest enemy. | will men
| ton all those who appeared against
| he measure Mr.. Bartholdt, member
| Of Congress from st Louis came be
! fore the Committee with q large com
! pany of Germa American women
| from Baltimore Philadelphia and New
| York Seven of these women read eS-
| SAYS (Which had evidently been pre-
| pared for them Tor they did not readi-
| ~ speak our languageJ begging the
| committee not to curtail their person
| nj libertN-the liberty to have beer in
| their homes, in the shops, in the beer
gardens where men. women and chill
| dren could assemble and drink to their
hearts content. Mr.. Barthoidt seem
| inglH thought ii necessary 10 have
| some beer women appear 10 offset the
| influence Of the temperance women
| who were there in large numbers. Mr.
| BarthGldt declared that the passage of
| the hill would be a terrible calamity
to st. Louis, saving that his constitu-
| cncy had tens Of millions of dollars in
| vested in the beer business and they
ought 10 be able to sell it as freely rs
| they pleased TO whomever they
pleased The next opponent to the bill
| w8s Californian who spoke for the
VINE making industry of his state.
| The only other speaker was Mr.. Max
we'll, a lawyer from Cincinnati, Ohio,
who said he spoke for the National
Wholesale Liquor Dealers AssOcia-
ton This furnishes the latest and
most forcetul illustration showing who
are for md WHO are aganst prohihi-
ton
need not speak of the great rrohi
hilton battle in Maine through which
we have Just passed II is fresh in all
of our minds. It resulted in a elori-
GUS victory, when we consider the tre
mendous forces employed To repeal the
law-how all liquordom massdd its
work and spent its money in this
state for months; when We consider
the apathy of some good temperance
met" who believe in prohibition but
thought the law in no Ganger-When
we consider that the people Of Maine
do not know what the licensed saloon
really is, and they did not realize the
strength of the license power. the
marvel is that we came out rs we'll as
We did. We kept the law and we will |
continue 10 keep ii in spite of efforts
To introduce local option into the |
State
When they tell us that the cities |
should have local option we reply, |
The State should control the cities |
instead of allowing the cities to con-
troll the State" We ask the Maine |
mothers where they desire protection |
for their boys and they earnestly re-
ply. We want it in the cities as we'll
as in the towns. We want it wherever
our boys are and our boys are in every |
part of the state"
When they tell us there would be |
less violation of law under license |
than under prohibition we point 10 |
Chicago with its 1000 licensed saloons
and 5000 Illegal liquor selling places
We point to Pittsburg where quite re- |
Gently the licensed liquor dealers have |
appealed to the city government To |
shut up the blind tigers of which there |
are 1000 in the city. but they have not
as yet been closed. The mayor OF |
Philadelphia recently declared on the |
authority of the police. that there are
as many "speakcasies" in Philadel- |
phia as there are licensed saloons |
PENNSYLVANIA is demonstrating il is |
even harder to stop Illegal selling in |
license cities than in prohibition ter
ritory.
1 respectfully ask the Maine license |
advocates how much better off would |
Lewiston be with - blind tigers. if il |
has that number, plus as many Ii |
cepsed saloons2 The fact is that those |
engaged in the liquor traffic are essen
TALLY Of the lawless type. seeking only |
financial gain, overriding as far as
possible every restriction placed upon
their business.
Thcy tell us that there is more liquor
consumed in Maine under prohibition |
than there would he under license, |
stating that in Maine one million dol |
lars is spent annually for strong
drink. Even admitting this is so, UNI
der license according to the United |
States Bureau Statistics. Maine would |
/ spend $l2 sou. 600 instead of one million. |
Is it any wonder that the liquor fra |
ternity desire to overthrow prohibi- |
ton in Maine when about twelve mil |
lion dollars less of their vile stuff is
sold under prohibition than would be |
under license?
When they tell us prohibition in
creases crime we step over into the |
near by local option license state of |
MaSsa chuSettS and we find that in |
five years i'll that state there have |
been 424 murders, while in prohibition |
Maine there have been 33 murders
four times as many in local option |
Massachusetts according to its popu- |
!ation as in prohibition Maine.
The defenders of local regulation say
that prohibition prevents financial |
prosperity, but we point with pride to |
the fact that there is a steady increase !
in Names valuation, and that the |
amount in the savings institutions of |
the State. counting in the women and |
the children, depostors is now $225
per capita,
| might go ON and on showing that |
prohibition has been an inestimahle |
blessing TO the state, and that even
at its worst. as we have it in some |