Fergus County Democrat., 1916-07-13
BISHOP CARROLL DESCRIBES THE
PRACTICAL SIDE Of PROHIBITION

Bishop John P. Carroll, head of the
Catholic diocese of Helena, writing on
the question, rs Prohibition Justifi.
able?" has the following to say:
There are two sides to prohibition
the theoretical, and the practical. From
tie theoretical side prohibition is GER
tainly justifiable First of all, it is
rot an infringement on personal lib
| erty. 1t bears relation to the com
munity similar to that which the
pledge bears to the individual BY
taking the pledge the individual pro-
hibits the use of intoxicating drink to
himself BY passing a prohibition law
the community bars the use of intoxi-
eating drinks to itself.
Community's Rights.
Now, the community has as much
right to take the pledge as the indi-
yidual. The fact that not the whole
community, but only majority of the
voters, as is generally the case, favor
the law, is no violation of the rights
of the minority who oppose the law
provided Just compensation is made to
| those who under the protection of a
previous law invested coAA lderable
! money in the manufacture OF intoxi,
cants.
''The consumer does not suffer, be-
cause Intoxicating drink is merely a
| luxury which does not promote his
wealth, his health or his happiness.
Medical science has demonstrated that
alcohol taken internally is neither
food nor medicine, and daily expert,
ence shows that it is the wost prolific
source Of poverty and misery
The pleasure the moderate drinker
derives from its use can justly be sub
ordinated to the general happiness and
we'll being of the community. When
ever, therefore, majority of the com
munity decides that prohibition is the
best remedy for the evils of intemper
ance, they have right to pass pro
hibition law. and such law is just.
A Right to Suppress Business.
Secondly. the manufacturer ant
dispenser of intoxicants cannot just
ly contend that the community ha.
no more right to suppress their bust
ness than any other business
"The liquor business is not on tn,
same level with every other business
II is a dangerous business, like tn,
business of selling arms or poisons
1t exists only by the federation of tn,
community, and hence may be regu
lated or suppressed, according to tn,
will OF the community This wa
the decision Of the supreme court O
the United States in the famous Grow
ley VS.. Christensen case rendered Nov
10, 1890. This decision can be fount
in Vol. 1877, PIP. 1924 of the United
States supreme court report 1t make.
most interesting and instructive read
ing.
No Church Law.
Finally, the church has made III
law respecting prohibition. She de
mands the practice of temperance. Sh,
regards total abstinence as the heroic
form of the virtue of temperance, ant
she encourages her children to praC
tice it. An evidence of this is the Gus
tom in this and many other diocese
in the United States of giving th
children the pledge at the time of frs
communion and confirmation TIL,
third plenary council of Baltimore
held by the bishops of the Unite,
States and approved by the pope, ez
horted Catholics engaged in the liquo
business to abandon it and take up
more honorable way of earning a Ii,
ing.
: "The church has never made an
formal pronouncement regarding tn
total suppression of the liquor traffic
: and she has no sympathy with the al
gument SO much used by the extren
lists that Intoxicating drink is an ev
in itself and that, therefore, the bus