New Britain herald., 1919-01-23
overthrow of states

overthrow of states
 aothing but the stirring up
 4zM of dust to hide the real
 Ind this issue is right against
 \ truth against falsehood, virtue
 ssst Immortality, and happiness
 Iiving against sorrow and suffering has been aptly said that law IS HnDt always justice. There was once sa law in our statute books which pro Avided that any persons with roIofed blood in their veins were slaves haE- ing absolutely no rights their white masters were bound to respect. mat law conhtcted with justice and was oyerriddcn at the point of the sword and an amendment adopted granting freedom to the mon of color through out the entire Union. The many graves covered with flowers on Deco ration Day and the shot-riddled, h1ood-staincd battlchags displayed at our state capitol prove that N0nnec- ticut did her share in this work, and glories in it.
 A great deal has hoon said about the taking away of personal rights from individuals in denying the sale of intoxicating drink. In q com munity's existence some rights which a savage might claim and exercise must be given up in order that more extended good may result 10 the great majority.
 A savage claimed the right to en- trap and slaughter at will the men of a tribe with which he was at enmitv. He hunted men AS man now hunts beasts of prey. Tn a civilized state this right is given up that alf may live in security This rule applies with equal force and justice to any evil which is detrimental to the com mon good.
 That an individual or combination of individuals should be permitted to exercise what they claim as their right by law and by the constitution to conduct a business for personal profit at the expense of the morals and well-being of their fellow-men is just as unreasonable as it would be for an individual or body of indi- viduals to claim the sava,ge's right to murder and scalp such as he deemed his enemies or for a white man to own cOlored man as a slave If such right still exists under our Constitu- ton, for -protectjon the few must yield and our constitution must he amended. The money interests in volved should not have a moments consideration when found opposed to the well-being, morality and happines of the people of this land,
 We have been requested to ask our represen tative to vote against the federal amendment providing for national prohibition on the ground that it is an infringement of peoples rights, dangerous in principle and of doubtful legality, so pronounced by the Connecticut State Bar association.
 As has already been stated in civilized organization of society an evil thing must yield for the good of the many, If any man can prove that the use of alcohol as beverage does not produce more evil than good, let him bring forth his evidence. If he can not prove this, then his lesser per sonal rights must give way to the greater rights of his fellow citizens.
 Dangerous in principle" What this may mean in this connection is hard to determine. It would seem to be more dangerous principle to DOT init constant temptation to be placed before our growing youth and those of weak and undermined will than it
 
 AS for the legality of the action: It is time enough 10 test that legality after such action has been taken. Our courts have been known to differ as to points of law. If the law really stands in the way of justice and right. then the law is wrong and must be changed. We cannot know this, how ever, until action has been taken and . FS1 postpone action in a matter of vital necessity such as the one now at hand because it may conflict with constitu- tional law is simply to put off 10 an- other day the xling that should be t. tended to now; is simply to play into the hands of those who hope to still profit through a nefarious business.
 CHAS. H. ASPIN WALL,
 Tanuarv 20 1919 Berlin Conn.