Temperance by Editor

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Mar 20, 1884

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 10, No. 12.

Temperance.

By Editor

Does Prohibition Prohibit?

It is a standing declaration of opponents of prohibitory laws, that they do not prohibit. The query may well be raised, Would these opposers think more of prohibitory laws if they did prohibit? No, they would not. If they do not prohibit, if they are ineffectual, why is it that liquor-dealers prefer a high-license law to a prohibitory law? It cannot be that they would rather than not pay money into the treasury, for there is more defrauding the revenue done by the liquor interest than by all others.

It is a mere evasion, and a very weak one too, to affirm that liquor is sold in those States where prohibitory laws are in force. Our laws against murder are prohibitory, yet murders are constantly committed, and the majority of the murderers escape punishment. Would a "high license" of murder be more effectual?

Why is it that a brigand in some countries is to this day more of a hero than a criminal? It is because at some time the rulers received a percentage of the ill-gotten gains of the brigands, and it was known that it was little use to try to bring the marauder to justice, as some means would be devised to enable him to escape. The practice took character from that fact, and a successful, bold freebooter was regarded as valiant and enterprising. Government protection will, in time, make almost anything respectable in the eyes of the majority. But it is bad policy for a Government to sanction, uphold, or license anything that is only an evil and a curse to society.

But prohibitory laws do prohibit. In those States where they have been tried they have been as effectual as any other laws for the suppression of crime. We have been much interested in a report of observations in Maine by D. R. Locke, well known as the author of the "Nasby letters." Few will dare to deny the statements of Mr. Locke; he is reliable. He is not a citizen of Maine, but closely observed when he was there. He says:—

"An Irish woman known to her countrymen as a dealer in liquors, has a room in the rear of her miserable dwelling fitted up something like a bar. She has one bottle of whisky, and a few bottles of rum in sight, but over them she has a weight suspended by a string, and under, a tub filled with water, in which kerosene oil has been poured. The beer is kept in a water sprinkler.

"She is ready for the officers. They can only approach by the front door, and when they appear she darts into the back room, cuts the string, the weight descends and smashes the bottles into the tub of watered kerosene, to destroy the smell of the whisky; the sprinkling can of beer is overset on the floor, and the evidence is destroyed.

"They search the house for liquor and sometimes find it. One man had dug through his cellar wall, and made an opening sufficient to hold a small stock. The door to this opening was a huge double affair, filled with sand, so that tapping the wall would not betray the fact that there was an opening, and the door itself was painted so close an imitation of stone as to make detection almost impossible. It would not have been discovered but for the man who painted it. He babbled in his drink. He took too much of the stuff which his genius had concealed, and betrayed the concealment. Thus evil is made to work good.

"Another woman had her cellar paved with flat stones, and under one particular stone the earth had been removed sufficiently to hold a large stock of the stuff.

"Other methods of concealment are employed. One woman has it hidden in privies, another under beds, others in stables, and in every place inaccessible to the lynx-eyed officers of the law.

"One woman carried a flat bottle in her stocking, from which she supplied her customers, and the officers who got upon her track had an amusing time of it to make the seizure. She professed her innocence of the charge, and was anxious to accompany him to the station, but first she would retire into the next room to change her dress. To this the officer consented, only he would go with her. She wanted an opportunity to get rid of the fatal bottle—it was her second offense, and the penalty this time would be six months in jail. That failing, she insisted upon several changes of location, the point being to get away from him till she could break the bottle. The officer was inflexible. Like Ruth, where she went he would go also. Finally she dropped the bottle and went. 'She languished six months in jail and her business was closed up.

"Another woman carried two flat bottles under her skirts, at her hips, and it required the services of two women employed in the department to bring the bottles to the light of day, in the police station.

"When her customers called for their drinks, she would hoist her dress and produce the bottles. Where twenty cents was involved she had no special delicacy. There isn't any delicacy in rum, either in buyer or seller. It is demoralizing all the way through."

Now if the opposers of prohibition will point out some place under license laws, even under "high-license" laws, where those who wish to deal in liquors have to resort to such miserable methods as are here described, we will confess that there is more virtue in license than we have ever yet believed. Can they do it? If such were the result of license laws they would oppose them as vigorously as they now oppose prohibitory laws.

The West Virginia Irrepressible said of a prohibitory law: "We are willing to give it a trial if it does not more than half prohibit." So will say every true temperance man. If it does not more than half prohibit, it will then be worth much more than a license law. High license is a sham, of which reasonable men will soon tire, because the supply will still be equal to the demand. A small increase in the price of drinks will compensate the dealer; and at old prices they who pay high license can well afford it, because it will be more of a monopoly when the poor dealers are closed out.

Reforms must be progressive or they cease to be reforms. We have seen the time in the temperance movement when a proposal of prohibitory laws could not have obtained a hearing anywhere. But to-day we believe that prohibition is the only true temperance platform. All other expedients have proved inefficient. It is a good work to reclaim drunkards; but it is far better to save our young men from becoming drunkards. EDITOR.