The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1917-01-08
The People Voted To Dry
Up Michigan-We Cannot
Go Behind That Verdict.

Up Michigan-We Cannot
Go Behind That Verdict.
The amendment providing for prohibl-
ton in Michigan. which was carried by a
majority Of 10000 votes. read so plainly
that there ought to be nothing at all ike
difference of opinion at this time as TO
what il meant.
This is the way it read.
Providing for prohibition in the state forever
Of the manufacture. sale, keeping for sale, giving
away, bsrterins or furnishing o. any NinoVs, malt
brewed. fermented, spirtuous or Intoxicating
Ilauors, except for medicinal, mechanical, ehem-
cal, scientific o. sseramental purposes.
Amendment TO Article XVI Of the Constitution.
bv adding thereto a section 10 b known a.
Section II. providing for prohibition in the
state forever OF the manufacture sale. keeping
for sale giving away bartering or furnishing Of
any vlnouf. malt brewed fermented. spirituons
or intoxicating liquors, except FOR medicinal
mechanical. chemical. scientific or sacramentsl
purposes
10 saie aly,nr sway bs-,srinr 81 furnisa TX
~ any vinous. malt hreNed. fermfnted ~
nal cheniesi sciepiiac5r sacrsra~nial purgosss
,hs state forsvrf The iegisist1re shall 5, law
provide regulations for the sale az stch hquers
aud s8cramental purposes
1t will be noted that the amendment
goes so far as to define exactly what the
legislature shall do.
The adoption of the amendment would
seem to have settled the issue Of Just
how far the legislature should go and just
how far the legislature should NOT go in
meddling with the majority sentiment.
1t is not an easy matter, therefore, to
understand the position at this time OF
our Anti-Saloon league in favoring a de-
gree of dryness that is comparatively
damp to what the people of Michigan
voted for.
Prohibition cannot mean anything but
PROHIBITION.
That is what Michigan's majority of
10000 SAID they wanted.
The vets raised the cry in opposition to
prohibition that it does not prohibit
The drys said it was lie.
Anti-Saloon league speakers said it was
lie.
Ministers from their pulpits said il was
lie.
The Times said it was lie.
Is it the object now to prove by an act
of the peoples Legislature that would let
down the bars, to to speak, that this claim
OF the vets was not lie?
What chance will prohibition have TO
prove itself if liquor is to be easily pro-
durable by those for whose benefit the sa-
loon was banished?
If there were economic reasons for
banishing the saloon, just what benefit
will be derived from prohibition if liquor
remains within easy reacS Of all with the
money to purchase IL?
If our object in banishing the saloon
was to Danish booze and remove il from
the community, what progress has been
made if continued and indiscriminate sale
and continued and ndiscriminate drink
ing are encouraged the way a lenient pro-
hibition law would encourage these
things?
Let us tell you something, brothers
Nobody ever succeeded yet in putting
John Barleycoin down for the count with
a stuffed club.
II il was the idea to GET Mr.. John Bar.
leycorn in voting for prohibition.
il it was the idea to DO the home good
turn in voting for prohibition
If 1t was the idea to protect men and
minds and bodies and take account Of So
ciety's future in voting prohibition, the
idea would seem to be that prohibition