, 1921-09-27
PROHIBITION AND CONSCIENCE.

THE long campaign against alcohol in this
country was directed against the liquor traffic" states
the Chicago Tribune. That is against the manufac-
ture for sale and the sale of Intoxicating beverages.
From this point Of view, with the ineontestable
evils of the American saloon as the weak center of at
tack, the cause was approved by q large number of
Americans who were not teetotalers and had no dis
position to impose their own code of private conduct
upon others by force of public law. They recognized
the evil economic and social consequences of the traf-
fc, and today they would support the prohibition
amendment on grounds of public policy. The saloon
with all its vicious Implications is gone, we believe,
and, we are glad to believe, forever from this land.
The vast industries of brewing and distining which
~fooishly though selishly maintained the saloon are
gone and are not likely to be re-established unless a
reaction of public sentiment is forced upon the mod
crate majority by excessive and oppressive application
of the amendment.
Moderate opinion made prohibition possible. Mod
srate opinion accepted the method of constitutional
prohibition because 1t was directed at a traffic which
was producing public evils. It accepted it with re
luctance, as in some measure infringing private lib
erty, because the public social and economic benefits
to be expected from prohibition outweighed consid-
erations of private convenience. 4
"But moderate opinion, which without doubt is ma
jority opinion, did not conceive of the prohibition
amendment as a means of imposing a code of moral
conduct upon the individual. If it had, there would
be no prohibition amendment today. If the amend
ment is SO interpreted and enforced, we predict there
win be no prohibition amendment tomorrow.
Prohibition zealots draw no such distinction. They
are confident of their own rectitude and they are not
only willing but anxious to impose its forms upon
others But in SO attempting they thrust the cause
of temperance into the background and raise a far
higher issue, the issue OF freedom of conscience.
"On that issue we have too much faith in the in
~telligence and spirit of the American people to have
any doubts. Heedlessly sometimes we permit in
Engagements Of personal liberty and private con-
science. The issue of personal liberty YVES, in fact,
dissredited in some degree by being used to defend
the liquor traffic. But its abuse does not affect the
reality and the issue of freedom Of conscience, which
is raised by the attempt to make prohibition cover
private life, will be decided as it has been in the past.
"H Mr.. Bryan or Mr.. Craft or any other prohibi-
lion zealot can walk into any Americans home and
tell him that he shall not put this into his own mouth,
because Mr.. Bryan or Mr.. Craft thinks 1t is bad for
him to do SO, Mr.. Bryan or Mr.. Craft can enter any
Americans home and forbid him to do anything else
they do not approve. There is already a movement on
foot to prohibit the use Of tobacco. Mr.. Craft is al
ready interesting himself in a movement to compel US
all to adopt his conception of what is proper for us
to do on Sunday. He or men like him are anxious to
prevent US from reading books they do not approve.
In short, there Is no respect among such zealots or
professional moralists for the freedom of the individ-
ul conscience.
ITO extend prohibition to cover private prepara-
ton and personal use of any beverage is not only a
breach of the right of private conscience but it is a
breach of faith with that moderate majority which
Joined the campaign against the liquor traffic and by
SO doing made the constitutional amendment possible.
Make that amendment an instrument of tyranny and
it win be wiped out as It win deserve to be-"