McNairy County independent. (Selmer, McNairy County, Tenn.) 1902-1969, 1916-11-17
49,
|Opll[]!ptallCe
Il NlotgS q
MAINE INDICATED.


vocates is to claim that prohibition
promotes pauperism. In order to prove
this they select few southern states,
where conditions are very different
from those In New England, and con-
trast them with Maine. AS matter
of fact United States census reports
show that Maine has fewer paupers in
her almshouses In proportion to her
population than any other New Eng
land state except Vermont. Maine has
127 per 100000 population. New
Hampshire has 230 per 100000.
Business.
The statement is sometimes made
that prohibition Injuries business and
drives away capital. But in the ten
years covered by the last census re-
turns while the great manufacturing
state of Massachusetts increased the
amount Of capital invested in manufac-
lures, 6395 per cent, the prohibition
state of Maine showed an increase Of
TIA per cent. The per cent increase
in Maine was larger than In any Of the
other New England states.
Crime.
The Boston bartenders marching In
q parade carried banner upon which
they proclaimed the startling news that
prohibition produces crime" This
was intended as fling at Maine by the
representatives of so-called business
that last year (1915) caused the arrest
of $685. persons in Boston alone, and
106,146 in the commonwealth, under
the high license regulation system. But
United States census reports prove the
falsity of the liquor claims. Contrast
ing Maine with her sister states we
find that in 1910 she had for every lOO,-
600 population, So prisoners In her
penal institutions, the smallest pro-
portion of all the New England states.
And thus the slanderers of Maine are
once more refuted by the official facts.
Prohibition, even when imperfectly en-
forced, tends to the reduction of crime.
Insanity.
While there are many causes OF In
sanity, the study Of which shows 1t to
be very complex problem, and while
conservative estimates by scientific au-
thorities like Doctor Rosanoff of Clark
university find that drink Is the cause
of about rs per cent, 1t has remained
for saloon supporters to discover that
prohibition Is largely responsible for
insanity. How placing the liquor traf-
fic under the ban of law can make peo-
pie insane is one Of the mysteries
which only the brewers and distillers
and their associates can solve. Ger
tainly there has been no prohibition in
the District of Columbia up to the
present time (1916), yet the census re-
turns show that on January l, 1910,
the number of insane In the hospitals
there was $3.50, or 872.9 for every 10O,-
600 Of the population, the largest pro-
portion reported anywhere in the coun-
try. How does Maine stand In this re-
spect as compared with other New
England states? If prohibition pro-
notes insanity Maine ought to be well
up at the head of the list. We find,
however, from the official figures that
Maine has the smallest proportion Of
insane-169 per 100000 population.
Massachusetts has 344 per 100000.
Drunkenness.
Opponents Of prohibition are fond of
referring to the city Of Bangor, Me-,
as an example of the results of prohi-
bition, and holding up the number Of
arrests for drunkenness as proof Of
the complete failure Of the prohibitory
law in that state. As a matter Of fact
Bangor is striking proof Of the fail
ure Of the regulation system. Under
the Bangor system Of notification of
law, liquor sellers have been brought
into court and fined, thus setting aside
the intent and purpose Of the law and
setting up local license system. Un-
der this plan the number Of arrests for
drunkenness has been large, not on &C
count of prohibition, but because Of
the reasonable action of Bangor Off
Gals. Any attempt, however mild, to
enforce the law has always resulted in
a diminution of arrests for drunken
ness, thus proving conclusively the
failure Of the Bangor regulation
method and showing the efficacy and
value Of prohibition.-Prof. John A.
Nichols.