The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1923-12-11
BY GEORGE w. II. BRITT
NEA Service Writer

d
NEA Service Writer
Ottawa, Ont, Dec. 11.--Trace q
steadily rising curve to dot labeled
1918, then drop it sharply to another
dot at 1923, and on the white paper
ahead place leering question mark.
There you have history Of prohi
bition in Canada.
On the rising slope are wavy ups
and downs representing the varying
successes of the Dominion Alliance,
or drys, and of the opposition that
fights now as the Moderation Lea
que.
But none of the waves in the line
has the sudden, violent, Jagged ap-
pearance of the depression since
1918. This plunge takes ones
breath.
Local Sentiment Rules
If you place the Canadian graph
now alongside a similar curve for
the United States, there appears
striking parallel. Fhat' is, up to
1918.
The eighteenth amendment has
held the United States to the peak
level of it's legislation. Unhampered
by constitutional restriction, follow
ling it's fundamental policy of deter
mination by provinces, Canada has
altered the course as local sentiment
wished.
But there is no getting away from
F! the parallel. 1t insists upon the
question. "Will the United States
eventually follow Canada in this lat
I est turn?"
Canada reflects the American
movement through most of its his
tory.
| New Brunswick First
! When Maine went nominally dry
in 1851, the adjoining province o
New Brunswick followed in fou
years with tentative prohibition
law. 1t lasted a year.
When the American prohibition
party was organized in 1869. it wa
followed soon by the Dominion Ali
lance. And so it continued. Do
minion wide prohibition was voted il
1898, but the government never pu
; it into effect.
County option" as provided i
the "Scott act" of 1878, was TO
years the Canadian national polio
on prohibition. In certain province
provision was made for votes b.
townships and municipalities. Loca
option was especially popular IN tn
maritime provinces.
At the beginning of the war On
tario had GO per cent of it's munici
palities dry and Quebec, rs per CEN
!, Has Time Restrictions
The war eventually brought dc
minion-wide prohibition. 1t was OF
dered by the government, effectiv
in April, 1918, continued until Jal
/, 1920, and was severely "bone dry.
Prohibition, by the province as
unit had been started in 1901, b
prince Edward Island. Influence
: by the wartime wave of prohibitio
. sentiment, other provinces fell int
| line. The landslide included in OF
2 der Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Nov
Scotia, Alberta, Ontario, New Brun:
wick and British Columbia. The fee
eral order brought it in Quebec ais
Dry forces, naturally, fougl
;. against repeal of the wartime orde
3 but in. vain. They did OHM, hov
: ever, a law which permitted dl
, provinces upon petition, to have tt
: federal government prohibit shi
d ments into their territory.
The dominion government alwa!
has retained control over the MANI
facturers of liquors and beer in d.
provinces and export from such pr
1 vinces. It permits that business t
day.
a Governmental Control
J. After the dominion dry order vi
T. revoked, the provinces began rapid
a to Jump the fence from the prohib
N ton fold. Quebec inaugurated
= resent system of government sa
and licensing in May, 1920. The ne
20 June British Columbia put a sim
= lar system into effect by authori
Of popular vote. Yukon territory Il
al lowed in September. ~
a This year the progress has CONT
- uedl Manitoba voted for COVER
= mentk sales in June Alberta in N
a yember. A petition is to be pr
sented in Saskatchewan befo
- IChristmas and vote is expected
= the spring. Ontario> almost certai
lily will vote on the question ne