The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1918-08-15
DOES VERMONT WANT
NATIONAL CONSTITU=
TIONAL PROHIBITION?

There are two distinct prohibition questions before
the country One is the question of permanent prohib
ton the other is the question of war time emergency
prohibition Shall we have prohibition as the settled
policy of the nation that is question. SHAH pro-
hbition be adopted war measure to increase the
resources and power of the nation for war purposes
and to last for the duration of the warthat IS anoth
er question.
We are in favor of both kinds of prohibition and the
swing of sentiment in the country as whole is that
way There have been notable conversions lately
in support of both kinds of prohibition, Take The
Outlook which has been very conservative IN It's posi-
ton on the temperance question for years-perhaps the
most influential of the great weekleS IN respect 10 the
policy of going slow prohibition In the issue OF
Inlv 81 it came out without reserve for sweeping prohl-
bon in wartime and forever after. 1t will pay you TO
read "The Problem of Prohibition in War lime
But the opposition is trying to throw dust IN your
ewes when it claims the temperance people are taxing
advantage of the war to put National Constltu-
tona Prohibition The war seems to demand prohlbl-
ton bv act of Congress for the emergency But II you
are not clear that poin-if, for example, you cant
agree with Secretary Daniels who says that IN the snip
wards great improvement has been wrought by prohbl
ton or with the National Coal Association which de-
cares that the country cannot keep booze In the mining
sections and have sufficient coal this wnter-f you
still have your doubts here, nevertheless you can be-
it would be mighty reform as great as the abolition
of slavery to have prohibition in the constitution
Did Congress act in good faith in submitting the
amendment to the states? Here is the vote on the
National Prohibition Amendment
Passed the Senate, August !, 1917, 90 to ~
Passed the House December II, 1917, 282 to l2S
That was no vote of expedency-"to clear the decks
for other business" The majority for the Amendment
in both Houses gives the lie to that statement Then,
Ta,,or r,,ith
tons in published interviews and in addresses to their
constituents have declared the honesty OF their vote
and their belief in prohibition They met the wishes OF
their constituents and acted according to their own
convictions
The fact is the entire country wants National Con-
sttutional Prohibition One who has not been IN the
west does not easily appreciate the immense enthus-
assn for the amendment. Not even war references IN
patriotic addresses bring the storms of applause that
mention of this matter does. This is the case with
every kind of audience Illinois and Ohio and Michigan
will follow Massachusetts and Texas in getting into
line There will be no rule of Minority states. Win
two or three exceptions possibly, the most popuious
states of the country will be numbered among tie nee
essary So
Shall Vermont be left out? That is not the prospect
today Look at these figures in the local option vote
last March.
The total vote for license in the state was l2,ooz
against not license 25,966-only nine towns Votihg
license And when you remember that many are voting
for license under local option because of the dhcutes
of law enforcement in dry territory with adl accent terri
tory wet but who their own confession IN FAVOR
of prohibition if it be made nationwide ana the
manufacture of liquor stopped, you may understand
how big a majority of the voters in Vermont want the
amendment.
Yes-Vermont is all right, She will join the 80
states on the Honor Roll of the states-f the people
ore truly represented in the next Legislature But
can't afford to run any risks. We must send to the
senate only those men who have declared themselves
out and out for National Constitutional Pronipltl0h.
W. tho penuhican nomination at the south end of the
County that man is Arthur s Payne OF North Benmng-
'O' BENNINGTON COUNTY