%,^ Si^.%^>^^^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 £ hi 1110 IM 2.2 u 1.8 1.4 ill 1.6 V] <^ /}. (?. 7 :> V 7 /^ 1 : CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Physical features of this copy which may alter any of the images in the reproduction are checked below. / Coloured covers/ Couvertures de couleur L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Certains ddfauts susceptibles de nuire d la quality de la reproduction sont not^s ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Th PC of fil Th CO or ap D Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur D Coloured plates/ Planches en couleur Th fill ins n Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colordes, tachetdes ou piqu^es Tight binding (may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin)/ Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure) s D Show through/ Transparence Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes M< in up bo fol D Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques D D D D n Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Plates missing/ Des planches manquent Additional comments/ Commentaires suppldmentaires □ Pagination incorrect/ Erreurs de pagination Pages missing/ Des pages manquent Maps missing/ Des cartes g^ographiques manquent The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de I'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^{meaning CONTINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaTtra sur la der- nidre image de chaqup microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ► sign'rie "A SUIVRE ', le symbole V signifie "FIN". The original copy was borrowed from, and filmed with, the kind consent of the following institution: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grSce A la g6n6rosit6 de I'dtablissement prdteur suivant : Bibliothdque nationale du Canada Maps or plates too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre reproduites en un seul cliche sont filmdes d partir de Tangle sup^rieure gauche, de gauche d droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Le diagramme suivant illustre la m^thode : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 I'rire '^!ii. Liquor Legislation IN THE iTED STATES AND CANADA. REPORT Of a non-partisan Inquiry on the spot into The Laws and their Operation, undertal?en at the request of W. RATHBONE, M.P., BY E. L. FANSHAWE, ■ OF THE INNER TEMPLE, RAIUIISTEU. 'h CASSELL AND COMPANY, Limited: LONDON, PARIS Jy MELBOURNE. [all KIOHTS HKSEUVKI).] /, -'<^TEK n.^IocA, n, ' " ' " " i-'^CAl. Omiox CHAITEK V.-H,,,L,,,^^ ' ^ ' * • • CHAPTER VI s ^^-'-' '" -8-'' '<■ ^untries differ widely in inlw "'^ 'l"'-'«'°" '" the t«„ clnna.e also enter Lo 3°""' . "-"""■■- Variations „f 'l'ffi-,lt to estimate, b°t , ol, T "~'° "''■" ^'^'-^ " - l-ads of difterence ,, so a ' 'V'" ''"'''' '^'-»"^^'- ■'•'>-^- are intin.te,, conn'e Hi r:^ 'inr"','"'' T' ^"™-'" another. ^' '^"^ ^"tt^i- de])cndent on one '"vi^^^^trSi '';:/:.::'''■'' '"'"" "" ^="s"-''""a„ ™f-. If he ,,uits ,1 e e stern T""""'"" '' ''^^' °' "-'d centres- to find hinBelf often ,l„ ' °^ "^'^ '^•■■«'='- bee. with his dinner i„ the din , ' '"'"'" ''^^■"^ "•"'^' - «ny l>our of the day l,e rolls ,n "f T'" °' "'^ '^°'^'- '^ ^^ -t find son. ofl-s T -1 ^ :,S~V'" "'^^ " "■^'>' themselves or one another to a Wa o >1 t"' "^' ''"••"■"^' It would be rash to nf, f "''>' °'' ^ cocktail, total abstainers i "t ,el ^ ll'; f " "l"""'^ "' "'^ ""'"'"■'■ ''f '^-l^ted that theyforl^r::', r^ "er'''"'"^'^"""' ^^ population there than i„ ,hi, ^^onn r , ' T°'"°" °' "'^' 's something disreputable or sinfM , J '"''"« ""' "'^■'''^ '■■'ifor is certainly stronraldwd."''' "se of intoxicating certain deference from nn" whnT''''"' "''"' '' -^""""-'^ -^ o' at all events do not ?ctt toM "T """"'^'^^ ^'^-->. "^'^"^-'----^=erbt:~-^^^^^^^ r ; American Liquor Laws. beer at their dinner, and prefer to go to the bar, \vhere they are not so hkely to be seen. I do not, of course, give this as the view of fashionable society, or of Americans who travel, or of the foreign portion of the population ; nor do I attempt to measure its full extent or significance among the rest. But it is a fact that it i)revails widely among a large section of tlie community, and is not restricted to those who are identified with the active anti-lie juor movement. It constitutes a marked distinction between the American and l^nglish ])oints of view. It is easy to illustrate this distinction in several ways. For instance, I found myself on one occasion in a small university town, when a banquet was given by the business men to the university professors. The proceedings continued from nine p.m. till past two ; nothing was drunk but water (as one of the professors told me, a little regretfully, the following day). 'i'he exclusion of wine at public dinners is indeed quite com- mon, if it is not actually rather the rule than the exception ; it is not unusual even at so cosmopolitan a place as iJoston. Then, again, there is probably no church organisation in America whose ministers could maintain their position as pastors of their congregations if it were known that they were not total abstainers."^ In thousands of private houses, also, in all parts of the country, no fermented liquor is ever seen.f The feeling against its general use is accentuated against its use by women and by the young, so that a special disposiMon is manifested to banish it from the family table. A woman em})loyed in serving liquor in a bar-room is an object rarely, *■ A case was related to me where soniethiny like conblcrnation was created among the passengers ia one of the Fall River steamboats by the spectacle of three ministers of religion ilrinking beer with their supper. t I have found more than once in conversation with Americans that an estimate putting the number of " teetotal" houses at one-half of the whole number of residences in the town would be considered low. Total abstinence has even reached the White House at Washington, where, during one administration (as disrespectful persons have said), "water flowed like champagne." Habits and Characteristics. perhaps never, seen in America. The employment of women in this way seems extraordinary to many Americans visitinjj; I'^urope for the first time. In some States it is expressly for- bidden by law.* I know of at least one State in which the serving of liquor to a woman in a saloon, for consumption on the premises, is a crime punishable with a year's imprisonment in addition to a heavy hne.t Serving licjuor to minors is universally prohibited, and a strong feeling is noticeable in many quarters that the young ought to be kept as far as possible away from all temptation to depart from habits of abstinence. A professor in a State University, not himself a teetotaller, nor professing extreme views on the licpior question, has told me that he should not think it right to place wine on his table if any of his pu[)ils (young men of the age of Oxford undergraduates) were l)resent. :i; Habitual deviation from total abstinence is often regarded as a disqualification, or (if not as an actual disqualification) as in some degree an obstacle, in candidates for clerkships or other kinds of employment. If a clerk is known by his employer to be in the habit of taking liquor, he will in a large '' Laws of New York, 1892, ch. 360, " An Act to prohibit the hiring of barmaids." Sec also Colorado, p. 307. f See Licensing Law of Rhode Island, summarised on page 184. In Philadelphia, I was told, saloon keepers are shy of selling to women. It is not illegal, but it might prejudice them with the licensing authority. X As showing the effect of this bent of public opinion upon the young I may mention an instance related to me by a clergyman residing in a large western town. He was present at a dinner given to a nundjer of young men, members of a local masonic lodge. Towards the close of the enter- tainment the glasses were filled with some kintl of negus. When the party separated, my informant, as he passed along the table to the door, observed that not one glass in ten was emptied, the most part luul hardly been touched. I should add that my informant was by no means an extreme man on the liquor question ; he was indeed a strong and (considering his cloth) courageous opponent of prohibition. Instances like the case just mentioned are not rare. 8 American Liquor Laws. number of cases fall into disfavour, perhaps lose his i)lace. I liave heard it used seriously as an argument against pro- hil)iti()n tliat under that system clerks and employees of mercantile houses will get drink in secret jjlaces, whereas under a licence system they will go without liquor, being afraid to be seen entering an oi)en saloon. 1 mention this, not for the sake of llic argument, but as an indication of what 1 have been saying about the attitude of the public mind in regard to the use of liquor.'^ Here, by way of further illustration, is an extract from the official annual report of the superintendent of police in a large city in one of the northern central States : — " Oflicers cannot drink and be relied upon to do their duty. The two do not and cannot go together, and whatever a man's qualifications may be, the fact that he is even a moderate drinker should disqualify him from belonging to any well-regulated police department."' Much more might be said in illustration of the strong anti- li(|Uor tendencies noticeable in America, but it is perhaps un- necessary. They are very marked, and pernieate the community very widely and deeply ; and they should not be lost sight of by foreigners who study the liquor question as it affects that country. Notwithstanding all this, however, statistics tell us that die American has lately been drinking on the average more spirits and more wine, though much less beer, than the Englishman ; and the consunij)tion, /tv nz/Z/rt-, in the United States has in recent years been on the increase. American drinking, more- over, it must be owned, is to a great extent a peculiarly pernicious kind of drinking. It consists largely in the treating * The very use of the word "drink" illustrates my meaning. To say in England that a man " drinks " is to put upon him the imputation of habitual intemperance. In America the word would not necessarily mean more than that he was not a teetotaller. Il.inrrs .lv/) CnAKACiERisr/cs. 9 and being treated to wliisky and strong spirituous compounds over the bar of a saloon. The liabit of treating has mucli to answer for. It is peculiarly an American custom in the extent to which it is there carrietl ; and some Americans go so far as to attribute to it the greater part of all the mischief caused by drink throughout their country.* Saloon drinking in America is no doubt in many respccth much the same thing as i)ul)lic-house drinking in England ; but treating is a special feature of the one, as, perha[)s, silent soaking is of the other. And the saloon attracts a class - clerks, professional and commercial men, and others — which does not to the same extent frequent the public-house. The American reformer, therefore, views the existence of the .saloon as something which may intimately concern himself, in his own family, or among his own relations and friends. Business men, it is said, are much more apt to drink now than they used to be, and the growing custom of resorting to clubs is alleged to be promoting the habit. I have heard the opinion expressed that drinking is decreasing in the lower and increasing in the uj)i)er classes. The great distinction, however, between English and American drinking probably is that the retail li(}uor traffic is in America concentrated about the drinking-bar far more exclusively than it is here. The i)roportion of Englishmen (in all classes of life) who look upon a measure of fermented licjuor as part of their dinner, whether at home or at the club or eating-house, is large ; in America it is certainly ver)' much '^ Two Americans go together to a bar ; one treats the other, wlio, feehng himself under an oliligation, must have his revenge. The result is in many cases that each will have had not only more than is good for him (assuming that a cocktail can ever be good for anyone under any circum- stances), but twice as much as he had any desire for. The managing editor of the leading newspaper in a large city in one of the central States told me that he had found the treating custom such a nuisanee that at last he made up his mind to refuse all invitations of the kind, and became practically a teetotaller. lO A.yrr.RrcAX L/qtok Z.nrs. smaller, though I found in some quarters a Ix-lief that wine and beer at meals were in growing demand.^ This distinction may probably be accounted for, in part, by the circumstance that the national drink of America has been whisky. Until comparatively recent times the native production of what may be called " table drinks," wine and beer, was small, while imported European wine was and is too scarce and too expensive to be anything but a luxury reserved for the rich. Of late the home production of wine has shown increased activity. California, tlie chief seat of this industry, produces some fifteen million gallons annuall)-, and the home consumption of Californian wine is .said to reach a million gallons a month. In Arizona and New Mexico the culture of the vine is increasing. Further east, Ohio and some other States produce a limited quantity of wines ; even prohibitory Kansas was credited with 130,000 gallons in i88y. The who] l)roduction in the United States in that year was stated in the census return to have been over twenty four million gallons. Still, outside California, the consumption of native wine is not large, and even in that State it is hardly a national beverage as wine is in Italy and in most parts of France, or cider in Normandy and Brittany. A good deal of American wine finds its way to France, and is thence launched upon the markets as French wine. American beer is the product of German immigration ; large quantities of it are now produced and consumed, but its origin is foreign, and its development comi^aratively recent. The total annual production grew in twenty-five years (1863 — 1888) from two to nearly twenty-five million barrels, and the consuni})- tion, per capita^ in fifteen years (1875 — 1891) from six to fifteen gallons. But, though beer-drinking has doubtless gained ground among the native Americans, whisky still * The custom of free lunches (food of an inferior kind being provided gratis, and only the drink being paid for) is one method of attracting the poorer class to the saloons. Habits .i.v/) C/iakactekistics. 1 1 {)redominate.s with tliem as the national drink, and the beer is to a very large extent drunk, as well as made, by the foreign elements in the i)Oj)iilation, especially the Clermans. The peculiarly dry and exciting climate of America seems also to have borne its share in intluencing opinion upon the li([uor question. I have repeatedly heard it said that peo[)!e cannot stand strong li(ja(jr in America as they can in I"Airo[K'. I have been told it by medical men who spoke from their professional experience, and by others who spoke of particular cases within their own personal knowledge and observation. The evidence, I believe, is strong that a given amount of lic[uor might seriously affect a man in America which in Europe he would be able to take without visible ill effects.* A few words should be said about the attitude of mind of Americans towards li(|U()r legislation. It is a matter of common observation that the development of the princii)les of local self-government and majority rule has been accom- panied by a disposition to show less tenderness for the rights and interests of individuals than prevails in Great Britain. Americans, in discussing their own institutions, often note this disposition. It, perhaps, accounts for the comparatively rare use in America of the argument — that local oi)tion or prohibi- tion is an unjustifiable interference with personal liberty. That argument is, of course, urged, and strongly urged, in many (.[uarters ; but on the whole it is remarkable how large a proportion, even of those who do not favour extreme repres- sive measures, are unconcerned by it. * A (listiiiguishcd physician has toUl nic of a case, in his own practice, where he had to warn an Eni^lish patient that he was killing himself by drink. lie was much suri)rised, and assured the doctor that he drank no more than he had been nccustomed to in England (he had gone over to fill a post for which he had been selected in an American University). My informant quite believed the statement, but his patient died, and in his opinion died of drink. The head of a grei * iKJspital in America told me that it was no uncommon experience with nurses who had come out from England to find, after a short time, that they had to give up their beer or reduce the amount of it. I 2 American Liquor Laws. Local option woukl ])rol)al)ly be regarded as justifiable and correct in principle by the great majority of Americans, what- ever their individual views might be of its value as a jiractical measure. And, among opponents of State prohibition, I have been struck by the large proportion who rested their opposi- tion to il solely on their belief that it would not be effective, and were not at rdl pressed by any feeling that it interfered unduly willi individual lights. A gentleman, holding a re- sponsible office in his State, remarked to me that he would vote for prohibition in the 1 )akotas, but not in a Stale like Minnesota, with its three large cities, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth. Many who would welcome real, effecti\e prohibition, regard it as unattainable. So, too, with the argument that the (losing of the saloon is an interference with the poor while il does not touch the rich ; it cannot be said that this argument is not heard, but certainly il is not allowed much l)rominence. And, if it is true thai the pro]-)ortion of total abstainers is e\cei)tionally large among the Americans, it follows tliat the number of those whose personal convenience is affected or threatened by jjrohibitionis proportionately small. The compensation (jueslion receives little attention, indeed can hardly be said to have any political existence, so far as the saloon keej^ers arc concerned. Such advocacy as is forth- coming in favour of any such claim is little more than academic, and renewals of licences have been refused in the most wholesale way without the question of compensation being seriously raised. The only real controversy which has arisen in connection with this ([ueslion was upon the right of brewers and distillers to be compensated for loss of capital on the passing of a law i)rohibiting the manufacture of licjuor ; and the final decision was against the claim.* * This was in Kansas. I heard of one brewer who lost 880,000 and was ruined. The U.S. circuit court decided that the brewers and distillers were entitled to compensation ; but the supreme court held that the question of compensation was at the discretion of the State ; and none was given. •i /Tab ITS Axn Character isrics. 13 Political agitation in America on tlio liquor (juestion is widespread, persistent, and powerful. Tiio (juestion is very much to the front in all parts of the country; the churches take an active i)art in it ; anti-li(iuor organisations abound ; and a mass of i)er!()dical and cam[)aign literature is constantly being sent out. The various li([Uor interests are [jowerfully organised u[)on the other side. At elections, where the licjuor (piestion is at issue, great pressure is brought to bear by the advocates of prohibition, especially by the clergy and women, to induce voters to support their cause.* This part of the subjec t cannot here be enlarged upon ; I mention it only to emphasise the fact of the extreme prominence in which the whole (piestion stands, and the extreme energy and bitterness w.'lh which the controversy about it rages. In "[)olitics"' it plays a peculiar part. The success with which advanced repressive measures have been carried in some States has been largely due to the pressure brought to bear on one of the great political parties by a section not large enough to carry its j^rogramme by independent action, but having great energy, and a strength sufficient to hold the balance at the State elections. The importance of public o[)ini()n (and particularly of that part of it which takes the form of political pressure) — not merely in the passing of a law, but subsequently in the routine of its daily enforcement by officers who hold their ai)i)ointments by popular election and for short terms — is a well-known characteristic of the American system of government ; and it is specially necessary to take due account of it in the endeavour to follow the working of the * At a recent election we are told that " the pastors manned the ten polling places, and the women and children prayxl in their pews. Every church bell in the town joined in the chime iieraldiiig the election of the no-licence candidate." There seem to be grounds for the belief that through the exercise of active pressure the prohibitionist vote at elections has sometimes rather o jr-represented the genuine desire for prohibition. See, on this point, Rhode Island, i73, and Ontario, p. 386. 14 American Liquor Laws. various licjuor laws ; as will appear in some of the later chapters dealing with individual States. It is made manifest also in the Law and Order Leagues established in many cities throughout the Union, which often display much activity and exert powerful pressure towards the enforcement of laws. A special need seems to be felt for such societies in the United States, as embodying the active expression of ])ub]ic sentiment, to which the officers of the law are peculiarly susceptible, when it is manifested with sufficient force. The reluctance of witnesses to give evidence and of juries to convict is another mark of the difficulty of enforcing unpopular laws, which has been much experienced in America.* And the legal procedure in most States lends itself to the interposition of " dilatory pleas " between the offender and his punishment. It is no very rare thing to hear Americans declare them- selves in favour of prohibition as a legislative enactment at the same time that they express their disbelief in the possibility of effectively enforcing it, or even in the expediency of making any great effort to do so. A Senator from one of the more sparsely-i)opulated prohibition States remarked to me that, though, he did not profess himself a prohibitionist, his experience in that State was inclining him to favour the system, provided it was not too vigorously enforced. A similar view was expressed by an ex- Senator of Rhode Island in an official report on the operation of prohibition in that State.f * The secretary of a Law and Order League mentioned to me a case within his experience, where, at a session of thr criminal court, a prominent liquor dealer was placed on the jury panel, who was also, either in his own person or through his bartenders, defendant in several liquor cases coming before the court. The secretary pointed out this circumstance to the district attorney, who said he would put the matter right. This he proceeded to do, not as my friend intended, by dispensing with the services of this individual as juror, but, on the contrary, by "continuing" (postponing to a later session of the court) the cases in which he was concerned, and keep- ing him on the jury. For a somewhat similar case, sec p. 162 note. f .Stv statement ol Hon. W. Sprague, p. 178. 1 Habits axd Characteristics. IS On the whole, the foregoing observations seem to show that, from the point of view of the advocates of strong repressive legislation, America is at a certain advantage, as compared with England, in respect of the general attitude of the i)ublic towards the liquor question. Americans, also, it should be said, are as a rule more ready to adopt experimental legislation than Englishmen, and are less oppressed by mis- givings as to the prospect of future enforcement. On the other hand, it will probably not be disi)uted that in England there is a greater disposition on the part of the executive authorities to enforce a law once it is passed, because it is the law, and without looking to external or popular guidance in the matt^ r. In America it does not follow that a law is enforceable because it remains for a long time on the Statute-book ; and, on the other hand, it is not necessarily unenforceable because it is not in fact well enforced. It is sometimes said that the best way to get rid of an obnoxious law is to enforce it. Whether a general application of this method w^ould have been more likely to result in the repeal of some of the more repressive liquor laws of xAmerica, or in their firmer and wider establish- ment, is a question which inquirers must decide for themselves."^ Appended are three tables, which may be useful for future reference : — • I. Showing consumption of liquor in the United States and United Kingdom. II. Showing production of li(iuor, and number of persons paying tax as dealers in liquor, by States. III. Giving certain particulars of growth and distribution of population, and statistics of crime and pauperism, by States. * For some general remarks on temperance legislation, see the add ress delivered by Professor Francis Wayland at the Sixth National Convention of Law and Order Leagues in the United St{\tes, printed in Appendix L, p. 409 of this volume. i6 A^rf^:/ucAy Liquor La IFS. TABLE I. I^inroR Consumption. (a) III the United States. ^'ear endiiie; June 30. C'onsuni,)tion per Capita .)f Population. 1S75 1S76 1S77 1S78 1S79 1S80 1 88 1 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1S90 1 89 1 1892 18S0 1S85 1890 1891 Spirits. Wine Proof Gallons. < lallons. I '50 •45 1-28 •45 I 22 •47 I '09 •47 I'll •50 1-27 •56 1-38 •47 I '40 -49 I "46 -48 1-48 '37 1-26 •39 1-26 •45 1-21 •55 1-26 •61 1 32 •56 r "40 •46 1-42 •45 I "50 -^^ (/') In the Unitid A 1-07* •45 •96* •38 1-02* •40 1-04* •39 Peer. Gallons. 671 6-83 6-58 6-68 7-05 8-26 8-65 1003 IO'27 1074 1062 11-20 11-23 12-80 12-72 1367 15-28 15-10 27*091 3o-cot 3o-i6t rota! of all Liquors, Gallons 8-67 8-61 S-33 8 24 8-66 10-09 10-50 11-92 1221 1 2 -60 12-26 12-90 '3 "99 1467 14-60 15-53 17-16 17-04 28-44 31-42 31-60 [For C oils urn J^t ion in Canada, seepage 392.) * Ordinary gallons. t The Statistical Abstract for the Unite] Kinmlom annears (n tnl- not.ce of imported beer. The figures relate onlyloXii /:,':: sman addu^ou must be allowed for what con.es Lm Gern.any ' " A^./.-.--The total quantity of alcohol (excluding whisky, brandy mn and rum) aseertamed to have been consumed in ^889 in Vhe art ma'nu' Clotures, and medicine is stated in the census to have b'een 6 4 52 7o BaB/TS AXn C/,.lRACTEKISTfC:;. 17 were wi.L„w„ !.^, o •„':„:/ h^.^^t " T,' eTi"" '" " "'"'T' TABLE II. Unucd Stales, dunng the year eudingjnne 30///, i S92. S lA'l r-.s AM) ThRKIIOKIIiS. AiHijiint of Distilled Spirits rroiliiceil. Alabama Alaska ....^!.;;;.;;;;;;; Arizona Arkansas ." California Colorado ' '" Connecticut ]. Delaware District of Co'lun'ibia Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois .'..,... Indiana Indian Territorj'...!.. Iowa Kansas .^. Kentucky [,'"_' Loijisiana ] "" ^laryland ... !!!!!"!"" Massachusetts Michigan .|'[.' Minnesota „" Mississippi C Gnlloiis. 9,964 a 93,863 '''2,532,464 rt'253,440 J •• ■■ S 4.Si,8s8 .... li 38,145 689 6,086,924 i 386 /r,646 33.756,913 /!-6S4 / ^-•,775,686 '.893,574 2.007,793 • • • (• fC « « I ■ , Uistilled .Spirits. u 3 U ■"■«-4 "■£ — -^— ■^ -Ti V a ^ 0) r: « 1 M.ilt l.iijiiors. ■\Miounl of I'eriiiLMitud I.iiiuor rrodiKod. 71 1,120 60 666 70 794 -9^ 44,054 : 2,864 45 3,172 26 405 : 1.578 . 475 215 2,025 i 888 ' 38 17,438 69 7,561 i i 3 3 j 4,706 : 4 ' 2,o68 ; 763 i 4.888 7 I 5,468 : 808 56 4,355 13 ' 4.918 ! .... I 8,183 2 ' 3,146 2 1,050 ■^o 43 9 42 465 60 56 6 31 15 55 16 309 ; 94 I 53 16 239 117 7 105 58 69 30 .2 ^ n! 2. i Barrels. j I 36,948 , S I 49 ; •"-■«■:::: ■ 3 f 13 I •■ i •••..• I 15 I ''793,646 142 ' 232 C-20I,092 26 151 ^^'360,216 19 ' 122 •■• y - . 5 1 8 ■ ?9 5 ',566 5 100 ••■ ti ... : ,9 „ 2,939,149 136 968 577.123 48 355 •■• * 494 ^'.650 I ^3., 3»o,4io 28 188 -^•262,332 ! 8 49 ■ ■• ^ ■•" I ! 214 ' i'792,506 36 61 I '.123.330 j 34 ' 2c6 050,823 ! 114 I 266 384,636 ' 96 i ,6c. ... A .., , I /, 24 I 26 160 91 1.^0 6 6 34 20 2. .6 3J 158 5t 61 37 5 6j 241 ';2 14J 22 i8 American Liquor Laws. TABLE \\.— {continued). bTATHb AM) TliKKITOKIES. IVIissouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire. New Jersey New Mexico .... New York North CaroUna . North Dakota .... Ohio Okhihoina Oregon Pennsylvania .... Rhode Ishmd .... South Carolina . South Dakota .... Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia .... Wisconsin Wyoming Distilled Spirits. .\mouut of Distilled Spirits Produced. Gallons. 3,279.148 //839 ^4.951.553 b ^34.309 7.37.521 rti.434 2,248,485 851,219 c 8,593.321 Total ;;/69,o64 7,394,232 .... d ..... 44,560 e 967,009 6.354 .... h I 341,855 ... m .... 385,275 539,474 "8,436,506 119 2 2 72 6 59 1,895 ■67 118 "48 334 16 1,437 3 I 45 2 I u 3 u 3 '"T •J T .^- u '« k Z" JX X ?: 7,849 204 2,217 54 2,277 46 552 7 1,669 9 8,367 81 584 6 38,678 942 1,468 31 303 15,943 351 339 6 1,868 47 12,119 427 1,729 49 970 16 1,079 8 2,704 70 4,807 73 642 13 419 3,474 44 2,012 44 1,362 12 8,891 III 419 9 Malt I..iiiu(jrs. Aiiiom.t uf I'LTiiiciitecl IJi|iior I'rodu:ed. H.irrcls. 2,047,696 //82,78i ^151,429 ... d ... ^429, 678 1,793,649 16,835 9,558,744 2,668,494 W234,ii7 3,203,632 ... d ... 6,221 ... e ... 99,115 115,393 ... A ... .... / .... 62,314 ... m ... 134,106 2,631,783 .... c .... n bo 20 25 iS 5 52 4 304 2 131 "38 272 5 I •^1 n^ r,-^ 406 48 138 6 160 268 12 1,581 39 24 265 17 42 619 24 -. OJ 22 5,925 1215,434 ,4,783 131,856,626 1,967 4 23 12 1,099 11 28 I 30 [ 4 63 41 38 6 67 169 399 6 8 967 10,031 is .— e 210 38 155 9 68 225 30 607 26 361 23 24 476 24 17 36 290 14 10 3S 46 21 140 15 4,969 a Arizuna iiiLludcd in New Me.\ico. /i Nevada included in California, r A\"yuiuiiig included in Colorado, \ 19-99 1771 2118 38-25 24-73 77-57 36 -06 25-97 ^53-23 853-23 267-83 173-35 a- S = If-" iSyc 19 27 7 69 7« 50 59 54 40 31 18 3'S 26 25 28 14 26 24 II Prisoners in Penitentiaries and County j.iils per Alillion of Population, 1S90. [i,2ji\[i,o6j] 714 608 364 1,109 1,016 1,361 1,580 1,620 903 1 I 825 818 925 941 565 1,152 1,025 1,241 1,645 [6So\ 587 858 708 720 5i'' 492 497 823 841 841 57^ 946 613 608 565 842 557 1,097 1,408 1,353 836 552 891 1,070 895 601 1,104 627 1,169 998 [675 546 772 820 «57 300 452 493 739 407 407 7,vS 893 Paupers in Almshouses per iMilliun_ of Pupul.iliou. 1893. 1,756 3,036 1,633 2,1 10 1,418 I 1,927 1,713 1,881 1,646 i \9^4\ 1,775 ' 1,534 959 1,324 1,038 , 923 : 502 490 01 2,015 ' 1,335 1,410 915 1,560 280 848 888 192 161 275 416 :So. 2-3 "-> 3-453 1,971 2,542 1,902 2,277 2,450 2,177 2,144 2,640 1,270 1,036 1,400 1,150 911 521 357 107 [f,'l'\ 2,181 1,543 I, '97 1,007 774 1 291 717 250 356 c 2 20 Amkricax Liquor Laws. 'I'AliLI-: \\\.—{iO)itiuuea). S/ali>iiiS of Population, Criiiio, and Pauperis /ii in tlic Uniit:d States. |C()ni))ile(1 fmni Census of 1S90. 1 Si ATics .\Nij Tl.Ki^^luKn•.s. \Sonlh dntral] . Kentucky Tennessee Alal)ania .Missi>si|ipi Louisiana Texas Indian Territory Oklahoma Arkansas [Weston] Montana , AVyoniini; Colorado New Mexico .... Arizona Utah Nevada Idaho Alaska Wa.shington .... Oregon California c - 1S90.' 46 42 29 28 8 2 2 21 Iiici-t:i'> ? )f Fupiiliuioii. per Cent. iS8o-go. 1S70-80, [2S-02]\ {sS-62] 1273 1 4 '60 19-84 1396 i9'oi 4044 24 '8 1 22-55 26 -f) 3 36-68 29-31 94*45 40-58 : 65-65 237 "49 192-01 11212 28-46 47-43 4 + "42 26-51 (do.) 90-14 128- 387-47 30-14 318-72 65-88 46-54 158-77 117-41 365-13 79-53 39-72 213-57 92 -22 54-34 "c : •? 18, (J, Prisoiitr.s in I'eiiiti-ntiarios and C'uunty j.iils pur bullion of Popuhition. iSgo.t tSSo. 1,012 1,210 1,097 553 1.233 i>95o 1,089 3-162 1,943 1,282 4,042 1,073 3,278 1,742 1. 122 1,348 2,263 /,3IO 772 1,262 1,072 1,143 1,128 1,960 940 1,940 2,646 1,384 1,336 403 3,196 982 1,078 1,259 2,489 r;ni]jcr.>, in -Ainisliouscs per Million of I'upiilalion. iB()o. isao. 849 829 874 m 412 383 109 208 198 407 305 132 131 [/,c'j6J[/,(>-^3] 999 211 237 7 — 385 99 298 — 940 1,526 237 205 316 M52 215 146 292 1,843 * Area reckonetl exclusive of water surface. The pojjulalion of tiie United Kingdoni aver.tges 31J per .sijuare mile ; of ICngland and Wales 300 per square mile. t Mr. .Spalding, the secretarj- of the Massachusetts Prison .Associ.uion. in a pamphlet entitled " Has Crime Increased in .Massachusetts y" shows that, while 1890 gives a l.arge increase in the prison population in that State over 1880, the coniinitments for si.\ olTences, viz., homicide, assault, larceny, burglary, forgery, and coining, which had increased im- mensely in former years, increased only 25 per cent, from 1881 to 1885, and in the succeeding )i\e years actually diminished. There were, indeed, fewer commitments for these crimes in 1893 than in 1858. It appears, there'"ore, that, so far as the more serious crimes are con- cerned, there has been a very great improvement in recent years. The great apparent increase of crime in Massachusetts is attribiuable to a very large incre.ise in the commit- ments for drunkenness (10,962 in i83j and 25,686 in 1890), and to a smaller increase in the commitments for other crimes, exclusive of the six above mentioned. Probably, what is true of Massachusetts is to a great extent true of other States. 21 CHAPTER III. PROHITUTION. IJ It is important to sec wliat " prohibitioii ' really means. In the programme of its atlvaneed supporters it means prohibition of the manufacture, im[)()rtation, exportation, transportation, and sale of all intoxicating litpiors for use as beverages. American prohibition as it exists to-day- "The Maine Law" — falls tar short of this, being directed only against production and sale within the particular State having such a law. This limitation is due, not to the voluntary action of the Legislature which enacts the law, but to the peculiarity of the federal system of government which reser\cs to each State the widest powers of regulating matters affecting only its own citizens, but commits to Congress the power " to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States.'' The complete extent of the right inherent in each State to regulate or prohibit the licpior traffic within its own borders is now well established. It is a part of that very wide and some- what indelinite element of autonomy, known to constitutional lawyers as the " police power " of the State. Many interesting cases have come before the Federal and State courts, in which the limits of the police power in particular directions have been canvassed ; but this is not a treatise on constitutional law, and it is sutlficient here to note that the judicial authorities have not generally shown a disposition to contract this power when ^^''rected by any State to setting restrictions on the licjuor traffic within the area of its jurisdiction. The right to sell intoxicating liquors is not one of those privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States which by the fourteenth amendment yl.uFK/CAX Liquor /.Airs. In tlic l''ed(.M-al (>)nstitiition llie States wore forbidden to abridge^" It has, however, ]>een held and appears to be settled law, that a statute prohibiting; the mere Xvr//;/;'* of li([Uor would not be a legitimate exercise of the police power, and would be unconstitutional, because such an Act affects an individual only and not the public : and the poli(-e power deals only with mm in their relation to one another. It follows that in a |)ro- hibition State the individual citizen is entitled to possess and to drink as much li(|uor as he j^leases, though it is a crime for anyone within the State to sell it to him. I am not aware that a law punishing the purchaser, in cases where the sale is illegal, would be unconstitutional ; as a matter of fact, however, pro- hibitory laws do not contain such a provision. t l>ut if they did, he could still get the licjuor from another State not subject to pro- hibition. This brings us to the (juestion of inter-State commerce. Prohibitory laws have not infrequently contained a reserva- tion legalising the sale of wine made from fruit grown within the particular State. Such a provision has by some courts been held valid ; but the preponderance of authority now shows pretty clearly that such discrimination between States is un- constitutional and void, as an encroachment on the exclusive ])Owers of Congress. Practically, however, nothing of much importance has turned on this question. Put two cases, decided in recent years, had a material bearing on the subject of inter-State commerce and the right of a State to interdict the li(iuor traffic. Both cases arose in Iowa. The hrst arose upon a provision in the prohibitory law of that State which forbade any common carrier to bring liquor into the State without having first * VoY a full discussion of lliis subject, see Chapters II. and III. of I)lack's "Treatise on tlie Liquor Laws of tlic United States." This hook (pubHshed by the West I\ibhshiiig Co., St. Paul, Minn., 1S92) is by f;ir the most complete legal work thai has been issued on the subject. t Tor an exception, sec p. 315, licjuor ordinance of Pomona (California). Prohibitiox, 23 received a certificate from the county auditor of tlie county into wliich the h"quor was to be transported, certifying that the consiti;nee was authorised to sell it in that county. The decision in this case was that the enactment was unconstitutional as an attempt to reL^ulate inter-State commerce — a decision which holds good to the present day, and which has removed a powerful check on the introduction of li(iuor into prohibitory States.* Although the law never purported to interfere with the i)rivate jwssession and use of liquor, still, prior to this decision, obstacles could be and were interposed to its trans- portation, which affected innocent consignees as well as those engaged in an illicit trade. f The other case is that in which what is known as the ''original package" decision was delivered. A firm of brewers in Illinois consigned cases and kegs of beer to their agent in Iowa, by whom they were sold to customers without being broken or opened. On a seizure being made, the plaintiffs claimed protection under the Federal Constitution ; but the (^ourts in Iowa decided against them. The case was carried into the Supreme Court of the United States, which held by a majority that the law of Iowa was unconstitutional and void, in so far as it prohibited the sale of liquors by a foreign or non-resident im])orter in the packages in which they were brought from another State. The immediate effect of the * Bowman %•. Chicago and N.W. Railway Company, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 6S9, decided in 1888. t A distinguished resident in a prohibitory State has related to me an instance in which he was subjected to annoyance and vexatious delay in obtaining delivery of a case of wine, which he had ordered on n>edica[ advice for an urgent case of sickness in his own f;\niily. It has been held in Iowa that the owner of liquor, which he has purchased in another State, may maintain an action against a common carrier who was bringing it to him, and by whose fault it was lost or destroyed. And if the carrier would defend himself on the ground that the li([uor was held for an unlawful purpose, the burden is on him to show that the ownership existed under such circumstances as to constitute the liquor a nuisance. (Bowen v. Hale, 4 Iowa, 430.) 24 A.WERiCAX Liquor /.ins. decision was to spread disniny in the ])roliil)ition States. J'.rewers and distillers in other States set up aL^encies in them, and offered for sale their products in barrels, kegs, cases, and even small bottles. " Orii^nnal package saloons " were opened, and the State courts were flooded with arrruments bv which it was souiiht to extend or restrict the effects of the main decision. Nothing but the interference of Congress offered hope to the anti-liquor parly. This assistance, however, was soon forth- coming. In August, 1890 — within four months after the Supreme Court decision — was passed the Wilson Law, restoring matters to the jjosition in which they had been before that decision, and in which they remain to-day. The law enacted as follows : — • "That all fermented, dislilh',d, and other intoxicating liquors or li([uids transported into any State or territory or remaining therein for use, consumption, sale, or storage therein, shall upon arrival in such State or territory be subject to the operation and eflfect of the laws of such State or territory enacted in the exercise of its police powers to the same extent and in the same manner as though such lic[uids or li([uors had been produced in such State or territory, and shall not be exempt therefrom by reason of being introduced therein in original packages or otherwise." The subject of the present legal status of prohibition need not now be pursued further. ICnough has been said to show that each State is entitled to forbid the manufacture and sale of liquor within its own borders, whether by its own citizens or by the citizens of other States acting through agents ; but that every individual citizen in a prohibitory State is entitled to obtain lic^uor from another State for his own use, and to consume it, without interference from the State law. A Kansas prohibitionist, writing to me in support of the law in that State, after describing the conditions which led to its passage, continues : — " The resulting law is an absolutely logical and defensible one. It does not prohibit any individual from drinking. It does not /^Kornnrriox. 25 prohibit the sale of li(iuor.* It does not trespass a sin^'le stop on any field save that which is deemed by all to be iile^Mtimate— all, that is, except those who are directly and personally interested to the contrary. As I have never yet met a man who was bold enou^di to say that there is anything elevating, purifying, or beneficial about a lic|Uor saloon, so, by the same token, no objection can be found with the law which prohibits its existence. That is all our law does. It simply says that no man shall sell licjuor for the purpose of making people drunk. It jnits that branch of the li(|Uor tralVic on a par with opium joints and other institutions recognised everywhere as radically illegiiimate." I give this extract both as showing what the law purports to do and not to do, and as giving the views of one of its supporters in regard to licpior-scUing and li([uor-sellers. ]3ut it must not be supposed that this limited form of prohibition satisfies the aspirations of prohibitionists. Any further extension of the principle, however, can only be sought at \\'asbington, from Congress ; and this is the direction in which the eyes of the more ardent [Kirtisans of the movement are now urned. One who for many years has been a leader among them has told me (and others have said the same) that he looks for the triumph of his cause to come as it came to the early anti-slavery men. The old ^^'hig party for long held their ground by the help of the abolitionists, but always dis- appointing them with half-hearted support. This continued till the abolidonists became too strong to be so put off. Then the Whigs fell to pieces, and the Republican party grew up with the abolition of slavery in the forefront of its programme. So, following this analogy, the triumph of prohibition is to rise out of the ruins of the present Republican party. The defeat of the Republicans in the presidential contest of 1892 is held to be a step towards this consummation. The attempts hitherto made in Congress in the direction of * This must refer either to the right to purchase liquor and ])iing it in from another State, or else to the right of sale for medical and certain other specified purposes. 26 American Liquor Laws. national proliihition may be summarised in a very few words. In itSyT) an amendment to the Federal ( 'onstitution was i)r()i)osed, f()rl)i(ldin[,s from and after the year iqoo, the manufacture, sale, importation, and exportation of ^/j-////<;v/ liquors, l^lcven years later this partial jiroposition was :>u])erseded hy one of a more thoroughgoing/ character, in the following (ungrammatical) terms: — "The manufacture, imj)ortation, exportation, trans- portation, and sale of all alct)holic li(iuors as a beverage shall be, and hereby is, for ever j^rohibited in the United States and in every place subject to their jurisdiction," a proposal which has been brought forward more than once. Hills providing for an investigation of the liquor traffic have been repeatedly intro- duced from the prohibitionist side. lUit the only measures of importance hitlierto passed by Congress, in addition to the Wilson Law (already noticed), have been one forbidding the maintenani^e of canteens at military i)0sts in i)rohibitory States, and another forbidding the sale of liquor within a mile of the Soldiers' Home at Washington, thereby applying prohibition in about one-fourth of the District of Columbia. Prohibitionists comi)lain that the limitations which the maintenan(X' of the rights of inter-State commerce places ui)on the complete adoption of their ])rinciple, add greatly to the difficulty of enforcing the law.* It may be, however, and has been, suggested that this incompleteness in the application of the principle, unsatisfactory as it is to i)ro- hibitionists, and however it may contribute to inadequate en- forcement of the law, has at least had the effect of lightening the weight of opposition to the [)assagc of such a measure 4k * The chief of the State Police in Rhode Island, during; the period of proliihition in that State from 1886 to 1889, gave this as one of the most important causes for the imperfect enforcement of the law, and strongly urged the necessity of making the system national if it was e\er 10 be effective. (Report, January, i88g.) Some prohibitionists look to punitive measures of increased severity as a means of securing a closer obedience to the law. Prohibition. 27 through tlie Legislature, and has provided a sort of safety-valve for it when it has been once adopted.* It is no uncommon thing for State prohii)ition, limited as it now is, to receive support from men who are not total abstainers. Such support is in many cases due to considera- tions of party advantage in jujlitics ; and the operation of this motive has played an imi)ortant i)art in the successes hitherto won by the prohibitionists. iJut there are those who, without being teetotallers, really favour — as well as outwardly support - the movement, through their hostility to the saloon as an institution, holding it to be a nuisance, whether as regards its effects on the health and welfare of those who frequent it, or as regards its disproportionate and corrupt influence in politics. 'J'heir contention is based on the existence of a great public evil, political as well as social, and on the necessity of making sacrifices to get rid of it. Only in prohibition do they see any remedy for city, state, and national misgovernment and cor- ruption. I have met men, belonging (^uite to the active and strenuous section of the prohibition party, who appeared to be influenced even more by the desire of eliminating the political influence of the saloon, than by that of putting an end to drinking and drunkenness. The duty of personal abstinence is, however, in general insisted on by those who take an active l)art in the movement. But among earnest prohibitionists there exists a difference, which sometimes becomes very acute and even embittered, regarding the attitude to be taken in general politics. The dispute is between the " third party " prohibitionists, forming * It would seem that, logically, prohibition, if adopted in a country having a single Legislature vested with full powers instead of a federal form of government, could hardly stop short of being extended to the importa- tion of liquor as well as to its internal manufacture and sale. In America the rights of the vendors in a neighbouring non-prohibito. •• State count for something ; but how if the vendors were foreigners ? In any case the delay and difficulty attending the purchase and transit of liquor would be greater when it had to be imported from a foreign country. 2 8 Amf.ric.w l.inroR Laivs. the extreme section of the party, who at national and State elections vote the " prohibition ticket," and those who do not thus se])arate themselves, hut seek to further the cause from within the ranks of one of the two great political parties. Tn the North the Republican party is tlu- one on which pro- hibitionists of the latter type have centred their hopes ; and, in op]K)sition to the " third party " men, they point to the services heretofore rendered to the cause by the Republicans, and urge that to vote with the third party is to give power to the Democrats, the friends of the saloon. The views of those of the other section have already been mentioned. They look for the disappearance of the Republicans as a party and the rise of a new great })art)' of prohibition of which they themselves are the nucleus.* * In illustration of the acute hostility of the third party prohibitionists to the Ivepublicans, I may cite the folloA'ir>i^ jiassage from a speech at the I'rohibition Convention of the State of Massachusetts, held at Worcester, vSeptember, 18S9 : — " The past rec(-)rd of the Republican party, which continues to pose before us as a temperance party, will soon be repeated again, with varia- tions, to keep up the waning courage of the rank and file of its members. As a sup])lement thereto, which would not l»e acceptable in their Conven- tion, I offer the following : I'rohibition statutes repealed in eleven out of fourteen States where the law was enacted before this party came into power ; constitutional prohibition counted out in Ohio, after l)eing carried by a large majority ; constitutional prohibition being counted out in Michigan, through treachery, cowardice, and fraudulent voting ; constitu- tional prohibition defeated by voting it down in n\e States, viz., New llamjKhire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Oregon ; constitutional prohibition refused submission to the people in nearly all the Northern and Western States, and repeatedly so in ten or more of said States ; constitutional prohibition repealed in one State, Rhode Island ; a brewery corporation chartered by the Legislature of Massachusetts. And all this, remember, was transacted in States that were under the control of the Republican party." At a debate held at Beverly, Mass., shortly before the presidential election of 1S92, between prohibitionists representing the two sections, the insincerity of the Repul)licans in their bids for the prohibition vote was insisted on ; while on the other side their jiast services to the cause were enumerated, and it was argued that their defeat meant simply the triumph P/uui/niJiox. 29 At the national elections and elections for the cliief State offices candidates have for some years heen generally put forward by the third party prohibitionists ; and the strength of their vote is in some degree a measure of the position held by pnjhibition in the political world. The growth or diminu- tion of the vote, however, is largely influenced by the attitude from time to time taken up by the Republicans towards pro- hibition, and the amount of confidence, regarding the strength and sincerity of their attachment to the cause, with which at different times and in different States they are able to ins[)ire the prohibitionists. Thus, where the Republicans have failed, or are supposed to have failed, in acting up to their promises upon this question, the result is an accession of strength to the third party, an accession which may, but does not necessarily, betoken an increase in the ranks of the friends of prohil)!tion.* In so far as the general growth of prohibitionist sentiment can be tested by the voting at elections, the figures showing the popular votes cast at presidential (-ontests seem to be the best to select for the purpose, as being the most comi)rehen- sive. The absolute strength of prohibition in some particular States has been tested by the votes taken on proposed amend- ments to their constitutions embodying it as i)art of their of the Democrats. The latter speaker asserted that on the average there was only (jne prohibitionist in twenty-eight in the North who heUcved in the distinct ticket. Prohibitionists of the third party an,- divided on the (juestion wheher the advocacy of female suffrage sliould be imported into the prohibition cause. Some hokl thai to mix up the cau->e with this ox any other subordinate issue is fatal to the prospect of success. * Temporary local causes sometimes affect the }irohibition vote. A prohibitionist in one State told me that some years ago at the election for governor the two great parties had very bad candidates. The Democrats, long the dominant party, ran a man who was said to be a drunkard. The Republican candidate was (I thiid<) a saloandiceper, or in some way inter- ested in the liquor trade ; at all events, he was not well looked upon by a large number of the electors. The result was that the third party pro- hibitionists polled an unusually high vote. At the next election the Democrats had the best possible candidate, and carried him by a large majority, the prohibition vote relapsing to its normal strength. 30 American Liquor Laivs. fundamental law. These two sets of figures are given in the two following tables : — POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT.* Pro- Kupublican. , Democrat. , i^n.nio,;;,^ Green- b.ick. L'nioii Labour. Populibt. 1880 4,454,416 I 4,444,952 I 10,305 3o8,57« 1884 4,851,981 I 4,874,986 1 150,369 175.370 '' 1888 5,440,708 5,536,242 j 249,665 I i 146,883 1892 ■ 5,175,201 5,554,267 ] 269,299 ! ' 1,042,531 The prohibitionists polled cii per cent, of the total number of votes cast in 1880, i "49 per cent, in 1884, 2'i6 per cent, in 1888, and 2*22 per cent, in 1892. VOTES ON QUESTION OF PROHIBITORY AMENDMENT TO STATE CONSTITUTION. State. Kansas Iowa Ohio Maine Rhode Island ... Michigan Texas Tennessee Oregon West Virginia .., New Hampshire Massachusetts ... Pennsylvania Rhode Island t ... South Dakota ... North Dakota ... Washington Connecticut Nebraska Vote on the Aniendineiit. Vote ^■e.l^. at Nearest For. 91,874 Agaiii.st. Election. 1880 84,037 201,236 1882 155,436 125,677 292,048 1883 323,189 240,975 721,310 1884 70,783 23,811 142,413 1886 15,113 9,230 26,875 1887 178,636 184,281 380,885 18S7 129,270 220,627 357,513 1887 117,504 145,197 303,784 1887 19,973 27,958 54,954 1888 41,668 76,555 159,540 1889 25,786 30,976 90,922 1889 85,242 131,062 344,517 1889 296,617 484,644 997.568 1889 9,956 28,315 43-1 1 1 1880 39,509 33,456 77,827 1889 18,552 17,393 38,098 18S9 19.546 31,489 58,443 18S9 22,379 49,974 153.978 1890 82,296 111,728 214,090 * The figures are taken from the *' Tribune Almanac."' According to the National Tcniperaucc Advocate (June, 1893), ^^-^ j^rohibilion vote in 1892 amounted to 270,813. If this is correct, the percentage, as given in the text, should be raised to 2 •24. t This was the submission of the (luestion of repealing prohibition. Prohibition. 31 _ Six States have thus passed votes adopting, and eleven have rejected, constitutional prohibition, exclusive of Rhode Island which adopted it in 1886 and rejected it again in 1889. In Iowa and Ohio, however, tlie affirmative vote was rendered abortive on technical grounds. One of the most active prohibitionists in a Southern State favoured me with some remarks on what he thought should he the general political attitude of that party, and, as they indicate a different point of view from either of the two already noticed I will summarise briefly what I understood to be his views.' 'i^hough, as a prohibitionist, uncompromisingly opposed on principle to licensing, it was evident that he had no faith in the policy of forcing legislation beyond a certain point. His plan was that the prohibitionists should organise their forces not as a political party, hut as a body of citizens desiring a particular thing. If they could show to the dominant party in the Legislature, or to the Legislature in general irrespective of party, that what they called for was the desire of a majority of the people, it was the business of the Legislature, and 'the interest of any party in it, to satisfy them. When they felt themselves strong enough to make their demand, it was better policy in the long run to adopt a conciliatory rather than a threatening attitude to the dominant party administration. Let them prove their case, and if they had support enough to justify success they would attain it. Above all, let them not form themselves into a separate political party. To do this was to array all parties and persons against them, and meant the destruction of their cause. His experience had been th it the Democrats in the South had given him and his friends all that right and reason justified them in asking ; and if they had not got all they wanted, it was because they had not popular support strong enough to warrant their getting it. Popular support and not political pressure was what was needed. And that popular support was to be cultivated and strengthened, not on political lines or through party machinery, but by a 32 A.Mr.KJc.Ly LiQfOK Laws. i\\\\Qi and thurough preparation of public opinion outside of and without reference to politics or i)arties. It is needless to say that tliis gentleman had no sympathy with third party prohibitionists and their ways. He pointed to the feeble show they had always made when arrayed as a political organisation against political organisations. The threatening and brow- l)eating of the Republicans in the North had led and was leading that party to abandon the anti-liquor movement. They had submitted for a time, but had grown restive; and the prohibitionists, in trying to force their cause by political pressure on the party machine, were reaping the natural consequences. They were crying out that the Republicans had betrayed them, and wc.c insincere, which might be true enough ; but the fault was with the prohibitionists themselves for setting to work in the wrong way. The end was one which they would never attain by the attempt to force it as an issue on political i)arties, or by making it the basis of an indei)endent political party ; but it was, he thought, attainable through work and organisation altogether outside politics, and when the right time came the legislation would follow almost without difticulty. Prohibition has, at one time or another, been the law in seventeen States,"^ in some of which, however, it can hardly be said to have had any practical existence. At the present time it is the law in seven States — Maine, New Hami)shire, Vermont, Iowa, Kansas, and the new States of North and South Dakota ; four of which — Maine, Kansas, and the Dakolas — have adopted it into their Constitutions. The conditions of Maine, Iowa, and Kansas (which may be considered to be the three most prominent prohibition States) will be separately examined in some detail in subsequent })agcs. The subject of prohibition also enters largely into the * Maine, Delaware, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, \'ermont, Michigan, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, New York, New Hampshire, Illinois, Kansas, 01)io, and the Dakotas. Prohibition. 33 account given of Massacluisetts and Rhode Island, States which have abandoned it and reverted to a licensing system. Vermont, and (as regards spirits) New Hampshire, adopted prohibition, respectively, in 1852 and 1855. In the latter State the sale of beer has been forbidden since 1878 ; a proposition to make prohibition constitutional was rejected in 1889, New Hampshire also is peculiar in forbidding the sale only, not the manufacture, of intoxicating li(iuors. Attempts to pass a licensing measure have been made more than once in recent years in this State and have not fallen very far short of suc- cess, being defeated in 18S9 by 144 votes to ri8, and in the following year by 166 to 148.'^ The two 1 )akotas have been elevated to the rank of States so recently, they are as yet so sparsely settled, and their expe- rience of prohibition has been so short, that perhai)s no great significance ought fairly to be claimed for the effects of the system in these States on one side or the other. In South Dakota a movement in the Legislature during the present year for resubmitting the question to the popular vote was defeated, but it would seem not without difficulty. f * A distinguished lawyer of New Hampshire has told me that prohibi- tion was carried in that State as a party measure for the sake of securing prohibitionist support, and that it has never been well enforced. I have heard a similar account also from other sources, but did not visit either that State or Vermont. f V resident in North Dakota gave me the following account of pro- hibition in that State: — The two largest towns are on the eastern border, adjoining Minnesota. Prohibition works well enough in them because just across the Red River are high-licence towns which supply all necessi- ties. At the town in which my informant lives, a small town at some distance from the eastern border, there are two " l)lind pigs," and the apothecaries also dispense liquor to persons who know the ways. (In a passage leading to the back premises a large bottle of whisky is placed. People help themselves, and pay as they please.) At Bismarck, the State capital, which is further west, drink is sold much more openly. His experience leads him to th*^ conclusion that if prohibition is enforced too rigorously the spirit of resistance grows too great for the law, and the evils of drinking become worse than under a licence system ; some relaxation is D 34 American Liquor Laws. The other five States fall naturally into two divisions, three ol them belonging to the group of New P^ngland States, while the other two are among the more newly settled States of the interior. They present some characteristics to which I desire to draw attention, without undertaking to assign the significance, whether great or small, which should be attached to them in connection with the ([uestion of prohibition. If reference is made to the table on p. 19, it will be seen that the first or " North Atlantic " group of States* comprises New J'^ngland, with New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, these together forming the old established States of the North. A glance at the second column shows that the three i)rohibition States are far more sparsely populated than the rest. The third, fourth, and fifth columns show that the increase of population has been markedly less ra})id in these three States than in all the others (in Vermont, indeed, there has been scarcely any increase at all) ; and that the percentage of " urban'' po[)ulalion is very much smaller. Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the most thickly popu- lated and most "urban" of all, have both made trial of prohibition, and have reverted to licence, with local option. Kansas and Iowa do not hold so peculiar a position in the Northern Central grou}) as do the three Slates just mentioned in theirs ; but the States in this group are, in general, much more newly settled and less thickly populated than those in the former group. Iowa, it will be seen, has just the same number necessary as an escape valve. The farmers, he says — including those who are not total abstainers — favour prohibition. When they come into town, instead of finding open saloons, and neglecting their business, and getting drunk, they buy a lK)ttle of whisky and take it home with them. I give this statement as I heard it. My informant was a representative man and must have been well acquainted with the circumstances, lie did not appear to have any very strong predilection, but was inclined to favour the law so long as it was not enforced too much. * The grouping of the States is that adopted by tlie authorities of the census. PlWHllU /'/< >.V. o5 ot inhabitants to the scjuare mile as Vermont, while Kansas lias only half that number. And a reference to the liflh column shows that, even in their own grou[), the urban section of the population in these two States is lower than in the rest, except the Dakotas, and far below the average of the group.* Turning to the columns in the same table relating to the prison poiHilation, we fmd that in the first group the three prohibition States are again distinguished for their low rate of crime, a circumstance which, it has been suggested, is wholly or partly attributable to the s])arsity of their i)oi)ulation and the absence in them of large cities. Iowa, also, stands in tliis respect below the average of its grouj) ; but Kansas is far above the average, showing, indeed, the highest ratio of all the Northern Central States. As regards paui)erism, Vermont has a lower ratio of indoor paupers than the average, and Maine slightly lower than the average ; while New Hampshire has the highest ratio of all. Iowa and Kansas both give a low return of pau]jers.t Upon the subject of the enforcement of prohibition little will be said in this chapter. This important subject can best be studied in connection with the particular Stales which have chosen to adoi)t prohibition, and the reader is referred to subsequent pages dealing separately with Maine, Iowa, and Kansas, and with the ex-prohibition States, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. The largest town now under State prohibition is Des Moines, the capital of It)wa (|)oi)Lilation, '■' The falling off in the increase per cent, of population during the decade iSSo— 90, as compared with 1870 -So, was greater both in Kan.sag and Iowa than in the other Northern Central States. t Statistics of pauperism are apt to be extremely misleading, unless due allowance is made for differences of practice in administering poor relief. In the Northern Central Group, Ohio shows by far tiie highest ratio of paupers. For some strictures on the way in which the poor law is administered in Ohio, icc p. 2S5. D 2 3^^ American Liquor Laws. 50,000). "^ 'J'hc town in which it is most strictly and suc- cessfully enforced (among those of any considerable size) is, l)erhaps, Topeka, the capital of Kansas (poi)ulati()n 31,000). The wide gulf which sometimes separates the will to pass a prohibitory law, or to oppose its repeal, from the determination to give full [)ractical effect to it is elsewhere noticed. As was once said by the governor of a State in which prohibition was undergoing a not very successful trial : " Laws may represent l)ublic opinion, but their enforcement is dependent almost wholly on the public will as contradistinguished from public opinion." I have myself met with prohibitionists who have attributed to official misfeasance the whole blame for failures to enforce prohibition. However that may have been in particular cases, it was certainly not the view f)f the majority of the sup[)orters of this system with whom 1 conversed. The more general opinion among them was that the successful vindication of the law depended in no small degree on the existence of a substantial body of popular feeling l)ehind it. Not only has this in very many instances been wanting, but officers have been elected on the distinct understanding that they should wholly or partially close their eyes to breaches of the law. Some prohibitionists have expressed to me in strong terms their sense of the difficulty of securing — unless for short periods and under pressure of an exce[)tional impulse the active participation of private citizens in the work of linding and prosecuting offenders. Zealous officials, and a pre- ponderating public sentiment — strong, steady, and active — - are, I think, according to the view of most thoughtful pro- hibidonists^ necessary elements for success in cities and populous })laces ; and it would be difficult to point to more than a very few cities of any considerable im})ortance where these conditions have as yet prevailed. Some who are in complete sympathy with the principle of prohibition have * Two or three larger towns in INIassachusetls are under prohibition by local option. Prohibition. 37 expressed to me their entire disbelief in the possil)ility of suddenly and peremptorily cutting off the supply of drink from people determined to have it, and their conviction that the de- sired goal can only be attained by a ,!j;radual advance side by side wilii the progress of a preponderating i)ublic opinion in that direction. In rural districts 1 found no evidence, in the decla- rations of either friends or foes, of any glaring and widespread resistance to the law. How far this is due to the force of the law, and how far to tlie weakness of the demand for licjuor, I do not undertake to estimate. The active pressure in support of prohibition comes mainly (apart from specifil organisations) from tlie flirmers. i'A'en while recognising the difficulties of enforcement, and admitting the failures, prohibitionists argue that, taken at its worst, it is better than any other system. The open saloon is the head and front of the mischief: drive out the open saloon (they say), and you have done much, whatever surreptitious drinking may go on. Young men who have not acquired the habit of drinking will not seek their way to foul places for the sake of acquiring it : let drinking l)e made disreputable, and the more so the better. If j^eople cannot obtain drink without doing something which they are ashamed to do, they will in the great majority of cases go without it.* And it is maintained * I have hoai'l it urged in depreciation of this argument, that tlic fear of doing anything which might sliock " respectability," though extremely strong in some classes of society, has less force in others, and that the driving of the business into holes and corners can only have demoralising results among the latter. Prohibitionist writers and speakers cannot on the whole be fairly charged with remissness in the endeavour to make the liquor traffic appear odious and disreputable. The vocabulary of invective has, by the extreme section of the party, been jilentifully poured, without respect of persons, on all connected with the jjroduction or distribution of alcoholic drinks ; ano nnd nrcuratc return. In the absence, tiicrcfore, of positive evidence, cor'^l'^sions are necessarily matters of oi)inion, l)ased on personal observation, or collateral evidence (such as statistics of crime,* wealth, and jjauperism), or on reasoning by pro- babilities ; sometimes, perhaps, on prejudice pure and simple. As regards crime and social statistics something has already been said, and more will be found in connection with individual States. Statistics of arrests for crime, and |)nr- ticularly for drunkenness, naturally and rightly attract attention in connection with the question of the efficacy of li(|uor laws. 'I'hey have their value; but are not unlikely, sometimes, to lead to false conclusions if too much reliance is placed on bare figures. An increase in the number of arrests may mean more crime; or it may mean a sharper administration; or it may mean a change of law, either making acts criminal which before were permitted, or rendering crimes more easy of detection. Variations of administration are si)ecially a|)parent in the treatment by the police of drunkenness in the streets : a mere alteration in the instructions given to the ])atrolmcn on their beats may produce a most marked effect on the returns of arrests for drunkenness at the end of the year, without indi- cating really any change whatever in the habits of the ])eople, or in the law, or in their respect for it. Under i)rohil)ition, it has been stated, as being the experience of some police authorities, that a diminution in the amount of drunkenness in the streets has been wholly or partly due to the greater secrecy with which drinking is carried on, the liquor-seller being afraid of detection if he allows a drunken man to reel out of his premises.! Due allowance should be made for these and the like considerations in drawing inferences from returns of crime. The value of statistics of wealth, as bearing on the subject of prohibition, is extremely difficult to measure in a country * See Note on Drink and Crime at the end of lliis chapter, f Sec, as to drunkenness in Providence, R.I., while under prohil)ition, p. i86. 40 /i^FRRrcAX Liquor Laws. advanring by leaps and hounds as America has advanced durin[; tlie last few decades. Moreover, the methods adopted in the valuation of i)roperty for taxation are very unequal in their results. The value as assessed is generally far below the true value, but the assessments are not uniform.* Among a large number of persons holding all shades of opinion, with whom I have conversed, not a few (outside the ranks (jf the pronounced ])rohiI)itionists)— some even wiio decidedly did not favour legislative prohibition — have ex- pressed with much confidence their belief that thai system had greatly diminished the whole volume of drinking ; and some claim to have themselves observed a marked improve- ment in the circumstances of working-men and their families arising from the removal of the saloon, f On the other hand, evidence is forthcoming from equally untainted sources to a different effect. I have been told by one, who as a parish clergyman had lived in three different .States under prohibition, and who, though not a prohibitionist, was a strong '' temperance man," that he had always noticed that system to be accompanied by an increase of home drinking and an increased tendency among young men to take to lic^uor. As minister of a church in the poorest part of a large town, in wliich the success of prohibition was being loudly proclaimed by its advocates, he found drunkenness still the great evil against which he )iad to contend. In another State, in which he was in charge of a i)arish at the tin ^ when prohibition came * The assessed valuation of Chic.ijj' arned in the census, was greater in 1880 than in 1890, '.he rear ^..ed being that the assessed value was 50 per cent, of the true val ae former year, and only 25 per cent, in the latter. t Sec, as to effect of prohibition in Atlanta, p. 322. An architect, who for a time immediately preceding and succeeding the introduction of pro- hibition in Iowa was engaged in some work at Des Moines, told me that he found a marked change in the circumstances of some of his workmen to have resulted from it. During the winter these men would be apt to re(iuire charitable relief, but after the saloons were closed they got through the winter without assistance, saving the money that used to go for drink. PliOHlBlTlON, 4» into fo'ce, his experience was that it (hstiiK^tly led to drinking, developing the drug store saloon, and leading people to take li(|U()r home with them. It was, he said, a general lule, rather than an exception, that a stock of licjuor came into houses where none had previously been kept. The results alleged to have followed prohibition in Atlanta, Cleorgia, are noticed elsewhere, and supply a striking instance of one of the charges most frecjuently brought against prohibition by its oi)ponents.* 'I'he allegations of fact on which th se two conthcting views are based are not necessarily inconsistent with one another. It is easy to imagine that prohibition might contract the whole volume of licjuor consumed, while at the same time it produced certain ill results of greater or less magnitude. It is argued that the extent of the evils of drink cannot be measured merely by reference to the whole amount consumed ; that if ten men have a bottle of whisky among them, it will on the whole do less harm if they all share it equally, than if nine of them take nothing, while the other one drinks half the bottle and spills the rest. Many prohibitionists would rejoin that the nine, as long as they abstained, were safe, while if each drank his share they would all be travelling dangerously near the road to ruin ; if, therefore, prohibition reduces the total consumption of alcoholic liquor, that means that it increases the number of people who drink none ; and this is a sutificient justification for it, even if it is true that certain bad results have also followed its adoption. It is unnecessary for the present purpose to follow these arguments further. My object is rather to note the fact that both these two views of the results of prohibition — contraction of the whole volume of litjuor consumcci, and increase of drinking in certain particular directions — are confidently and honestly held by persons who have seen the system in operation ; and it can hardly be doubted that there are substantial grounds for both of them. * See also Massachusetts, p. 190 ; Iowa, \>. 168. 42 A.vF.h'ir.ix LiQL'OR Z.nrs. Connected with the question of the amount of liquor consumed is that of the extent to which illegal selling goes on. This iriust be considered in detail, in relation to individual States. Reference, however, may here be made to the table l)rinted on [)p. 17, 18, in which the number of liquor-dealers l)aying, as such, the United States tax in each State is given. The United States Government collects a tax from every jierson (irrespective of the State laws) who manufactures or deals Ijy wholesale or retail in intoxicating liquors. Obviously, in prohibitory States, the payment of thi ^ax is of itself in many cases strong />n'/;/(i facie proof of a breach of the law. And by the law of those States it is generally so regarded. The proportion of tax-paying retail liquor-dealers to population is as follows in the prohibitory States and in a few other non- prohibitory ones, which are added for the sake of comparison : — PROIIIIUTORV .STATKS. Maine ... New Ilanipsliirc \'ermont Iowa Kansas ... North Dakota Soutli Dakota ... NON-rROIIIBITORY Massachusetts ... Pennsylvania ... Illinois ... Minnesota Nebraska Cicorpjia . I to 647 "i I to 205 . I to 742 . I to 386 • I to 571 • I to 559 . I to 299 ) STATES.* • I to 437 -^ r to 413 I . I to 20S [ • I to 393 . I to 438 . I to 864 ; Average I to 42S Averacje I to 352 * Of these six Slates, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania are old States with lar£jc urban populations, hit;h-licence, and restriction on the number of saloons, the former having also local option. Illinois contains Chicago, which has a very large drinking population and a great many saloons. Minnesota and Nebraska are highdicencc States of the interior, their general conditions being not dissimilar from Iowa and Kansas. Cieorgia is taken as a representative local option State of the South. -Pfy(''fnn/77ox. 43 1 The dispnnty is perhnps less n,nrl -•" -- - • ^ pay the tax, , and I endeavoured to ascertain with what legitimate T -^ee, as to druirgist.s in Portland, p. io6. 44 American Liquor Laws. object they might pay it. They clearly may not sell for the excepted })urposes, since only the authorised agent may do that. I at first thought that pcrhai)s the keei)ing of liquor, not for sale as such, but for use in compounding drugs might render a druggist liable to the tax, though not amenable to the State law. A lawyer in Maine, however, from whom I sought counsel, writes as follows : — " The answer to your (|uestion — ' l*'or what l)urpose, re(juiring payment of United States licjuor tax, but not illegal according to State law, do apothecaries keep intoxi- cating lifiuors ?'--is that the law of the United States requires persons engaged in the retail liijuor business to pay a special tax. Apothecaries who simply use intoxicating liquors for the purpose of compounding medicines are not retail lifjuor dealers under the statute, and consequently are not required to pay the special tax. It is not illegal under the State law for apothecaries to keep li(|Uor for the purpose of compounding medicines. It is only when apothecaries keep li([uor for sale as sucJi that they must pay the tax or are liable to the penalties of the State law." I am quite unable to say why apothecaries in Maine (or in any other prohibitory State if they are not permit-holders) should j)ay the retail liquor tax unless they intend to sell liquor in defiance of the State law. It should be noted also that the number of retail der ers who pay for malt liquor only is not inconsiderable in the i)ro- hibition States, as also of wholesale dealers (who arc not allowed to sell in ([uantities less than five gallons at a time) ; and most of these States are not entirelv devoid of breweries and distilleries.* The necessity of allowing the traffic in alcoholic lic^uors for medicinal, mechanical, and other pur[)oses for which they are recjuired for use otherwise than as a beverage, has been one of the difficulties in prohibitory legislation. The limitation by medical prescriptions, or sworn statements made to specially * See table on pp. 17, 18. Prohibition. 45 authorised apothecaries, has often been found to be much abused, notwithstanding the elaborate restrictions under which the sales are required to be made. The town agency might appear more likely to be strictly conducted, but municipalities have certainly not always exercised great vigilance over the conduct of the agencies. Some laws allow only pure alcohol to be sold for the excepted purposes. And in examining the si)ecial prohibitory laws affecting particular counties or towns, so common in the Southern States, I have found a good many instances where the permission to sell for the excepted purposes either has not been given, or has been withdrawn by a sub- sequent Act as being found impossible to be kept clear of abuse. There appears to be good reason for the statement (which prima facie seems i)robal)le) that prohibition is more readily made effective against malt licjuor than against s[)irits, and that the average ([uality of the litjuor surreptitiously sold under [prohibition is inferior. Beer barrels arc too bulky to be easily handled where secrecy and concealment are required. The ex[)erience of the " Rum Room" of Portland (Maine), where seized liquor is stored before being destroyed, gives direct evidence of this fa(^t, as also of the low quality of the whisky. There was also evidence that on the repeal of prohibition in Massachusetts a diminution of the trade in distilled spirits ensued, owing to the increased consumption of beer."^ And, if exigencies of space render it difficult — where the civil power is inc^uisitive — for the drug-st^ "e saloon and illicit drink- shopt to dispose of malt lie[uor, it is still more evident that the stock-in-trade of that most pertinacious and elusive violator oi * Sec p. 197. f The names for places where drink is surreptitiously obtained are many. "Joints," "dives," "kitehen har-ruoms," " speakeasies," " blind pigs," " l)lind tigers," " holes-in-the-wall "-these are some of the terms in common use in different parts of the country, 'llie existence of such places is, of course, not contmed to areas under prohil)ition. The peculiarity of the "hole-in-the-wall " is that the seller and buyer do not see each other. 46 Ami: KHAN Liovor Laws. u prohihitoiy laws -the pocket pedtller or " bootlegger " -must he as concentrated and i)ortable in form as possible. I'or ]nirposes of sale, li(iu(;r has been concealed in eggs, in re(e[)ta^ .South Dakota 64 }22 Massachusetts 3^S 47 Nebraska 66 135 Rhode Island 43 40 Kansas 121 88 Connecticut ... 82 74 New York New Jersey 79 54 55 55 56 [SoutJi Central. 1 " 1 V^3^] [/^!i| Pennsylvania 42 Kentucky 236 1 12 v/ w/ I'ennessee ... 168 117 [South Atlar,tic.\ Helaware 55 Alabama Mississippi ... 222 168 138 1-9 Maryland 81 'J •J 103 Louisiana 293 189 J District of Columbia Virginia West Virginia 43 98 88 51 98 52 Texas... Oklahoma Arkansas 327 176 281 North Carolina 86 46 South Carolina 137 S7 {Western.] V^7(>\ V27A Georgia 189 121 Montana 340 26 Florida 289 115 Wyoming 82 241 Colorado 184 ^Zl [North Ccntial.^ [So] {7J\ New Mexico 358 117 Ohio 59 43 Arizona 906 371 Indiana 103 79 Utah 96 28 Illinois 95 87 Nevada 896 739 Micliigan 84 65 Idaho 308 215 Wisconsin 75 54 Washington 120 266 Minnesota ... 50 67 Oregon 172 109 Iowa ... 60 57 California 346 354 It appears from the foregoing table that of the three prohibition States E 50 American Liquor Laws. in the North Atlantic group, Maine and Vermont have a ratio of homicides in excess of the averaj^e in that {^roup, while in New Hampshire the ratio is below the average. In each case there is an increase over iSSo. In the case of New Hampshire this increase is but slight, but in Maine and Vermont it largely exceeds the average increase for the group. In the Northern Central group, Iowa shows a ratio below, and Kansas above, the average ; but both show an increase over 1880. The Dakotas, also prohibition States, have a lower ratio, but a large increase over 1880 ; these States, however, are so newly formed that their conditions, perhaps, hariUy approximate to those of the other States in the group. In the prohibition States of New England the negro element hardly comes into account : in Kansas about one-flfth, and in Iowa one-eleventh, of the homicides are charged to negroes. It seems that in Iowa seven, and in Kansas five, executions took place in 1890 ; in the three New England States none. In the same bulletin an analysis is made of the habits of prisoners charged with homicide as to the use of intoxicating liquors, from which it appears that throughout the whole country those returned respectively as total abstainers and as drunkards were almost identically equal in number, with a very slight preponderance of the former. "Occasional" and "moderate" drinkers numbered about tlirec times as many as either of the others ; while about one-eighth of the whole number were returned as " unknown.'' Thus, 1,282 were total abstainers. 703 ,, occasional drinkers. 3,126 ,, moderate ,, 1,267 ,, drunkards. 973 ,, unknown. In commenting, at the conclusion of the bulletin (which covers 76 pages), on the "demonstration which it furnishes of the erroneous nature of certain prevalent beliefs," the writer remarks: "Intemperance is a cause of crime, though a less active and immediate cause than is popularly supposed. But 20* lo per cent, were total abstainers, and only I9'S7 per cent, are returned as drunkards." 51 i CHAPTER IV. T.OCAI, Dl'Tlox. themselves there ire na/.T \ ''''"'-'"'* P™hil,iiionists State by a large majorit)-, it i.s not likely to he ucll enfor^.H any part,cular locality in the State which doe ^^^ vl ^ for oca :'V" '"'■°"' " '' "=°"'' -^""P"- -^ Powerf r,; nment proh,h.t.n to he adopted in Jt.st those places '^irf:,^ some ,„„. i„ ,,;,; ,r:i:;:^zr:z an „i '"'"?' '^'^'^^^'^'''^e "- liquor trade in the cities and mak.ng people indifferent to the only true remedy* evicLtZot't"'';";,'" 7'' 'rr- '"■ ^^=' «-'^^-". - sivin^ 52 American Liquor F.aws. Others, again, su[)port it with more or less zeal, on the i^round that it is, at least, a step in the right direction, and a measure calculated to have a salutary effect in educating and preparing tlie public mind to welcome what they consider a hetter and more thorough solution of the liijuor problem. Local option in the most commonly understood meaning ot the term — the j)o\ver to close all li([Uor sho|)s within a given area by vote of the inhabitants (the "direct veto") —forms l)art of the li(iuor law in a large number of States in all jiarts of the country ; but its chosen hahitat^ where it flourishes with the greatest vigour, is the South. Though legally enacted in several of the northern States, there is, I believe, only one of them — Massachusetts— in which it has at the present time any really extensive operation. In several others, indeed, a vigorous effort has been made to give effect to it, but without lasting success."^ In the South, however, it seems to be firmly established, and has driven the open saloon out of a large proportion of the rural districts; and in princi])le, at least, if not in practice, it receives much support in the North. In Minnesota, for instance, there has been recently a disposition to move for a wider recognition of it by the Legislature, and in it implies the treating of the question as one of mere expediency, and injures the moral side of it ; it can be enforced where the traftic is weak ; where enforce.!, it is at the expense of other areas ; it is never enforced except in a rural area (unless as a nine days' wonder) ; it makes its supporters the opponents of prohibition, as has been proved in the United States, where those who have voted for local option have voted against a State law of prohibition ; much more licpior (he affirmed) is sold in the States which have ado|ited local option than in the same States l)efore they adopted it. Drink, in his view, is not a local but a national question ; the thing to be suppressed is not the licjuor traflic or the saloon, l)ut drink. " With all that can be said in its favour, it must nevertheless be confessed that local option affords an opportunity for the saloon to become the most active, offensive, and corrupt factor in politics." — (Rev. II. Montgomery : " Open Letters to the Citizens of Massachusetts.") * See especially the account of local option in Michigan and Missouri, in subsequent chapters. Illinois, also. Local OrrioN. 53 Pennsylvania an unsuccessful attempt has hcen made in 189^^ to |)ass a local option law. In Canada the local ojjlion law jjassed in 1S7S hy the Dominion Parliament ai)i)ears, after a short peri(Kl of activity to have fallen out of favour with the anti-li([uor i)arty, who are now turning their attention more i>arlicularly to an agitation tor complete proliibilion, either by provinces or throughout the whole Dominion. An older and less comprehensive local option law, however, extending only to (Quebec and Ontario, has had a steady operation in the former of those i)rovinces, and within the last two or three years has shown signs ot renewed vitality in the latter. But the failure of the Scott Act in Ontario has struck a severe blow in Canada at })ublic confidence in the efficacy of local option.* In comparing the methods adopted by different Legislatures which have embraced the principle of the direct veto, some important variations of detail present themselves. First, as regards the area of adoption, opinions differ whether the county or a smaller division should be taken. The more ambitious spirits among the optionists favour the county as tlic unit, reserving (perhaps) the larger towns or cities for sei)arate treatment. In support of this view it is argued that, where prohibition is adopted in a very small area, the chances are great that it cannot be made effective, because peo[)le can so easily get drink at no great distance. Moreover, it is said that the towns where " no licence " is voted are in danger of losing trade, because the country people, where they have the choice, are apt to come to market and seek their sui)plies in towns where liquor is sold, and will travel a somewhat longer distance for that purpose, avoiding the prohibition town where they would naturally find their market. The objection to the larger area is the probability of a less efficient administration. The Scott Act, which had so For some account of local option in Canada, see Chapter XX. 54 American Liquor Laws, unsuccessful a career in Ontario, was local option by counties and cities ; and its failure has by some been in part attributed U) the too great extent of the area of adoption. The older Dunkin Act, which can be adopted by townships, has in the long run shown greater vitality than the Scott Act, and is now in force in a considerable portion of the i)rovince of (^)uebec. In Michigan and Missouri States, where local option, after attracting much attention a few years ago, does not exhibit an encouraging aspect at the present time, the area of adoption is the county. (Jn the other hand, Massachusetts, in which the principle shows far more vigour than in any other State in the North, ap[)lies it to every city and township, and thus comprises three hundred and fifty independent divisions in a territory about as large as Yorkshire and Lancashire. In the South the local option area is commonly the county. In that section of the country, though State i)rohibition has not gained a footing, the local option and licensing laws are in general of an extremely restrictive character.* The conditions of the South are peculiar. The large negro element (in three States forming an absolute majority of the population) imports a distinct feature into the liquor (question in that part of the country, where it is largely a (juestion of police and good order, and where the i)revalence of pistol-shooting rowdiness and of crimes of violence, esi)ecially among the negroes, has * In the southern Status it lias been very much the custom to deal with the matter by special les^islation, which is in fact, though not in form, a species of local ojjtion, since such laws are passed by the State Legis- lature at the instance of the localities concerned {sec pp. 317, 336, 356, 367). Some advantage is claimeil for this mode of procedure as compared with that of a vote under the general local option law {see p. 319). But at present there is a disposition to check special legislation. Kentucky has by its new Constitution put a stop to it for the future. In some places the sale of liquor is forbidden by special clauses in deeds of conveyance, or in charters of incorporation — as, for example, in Colorado Springs (p. 304), and Evanston near Chicago (p. 295). Landowners who are large employers of labour sometimes enforce prohibition in the area under their immediate control {.eg., Pullman, Illinois, and Marysville, N.K.). Local Option. 55 contributed greatly to i)romotc repressive lit|U()r legislation. "**■ Some of the southern States are now under proiiibition to liie extent of much more than iialf their geographical area, though {)rol)ahly not that proportion of their poinilation. In the larger towns it is not often adopted, but in the rural districts the closing of the " cross-road doggery '' i found to be generally regarded as an object whi(-h merited, and very fre(iuently was the means of securing, a prei)onderating " dry " vote. The negro has generally little self-control, and is therefore specially liable to the evils of drink. He will spend his money for it, then neglect his work, starve and ill-treat his family, begin to pilfer his employer, finally become a thief and a criminal. In his downward course he will take others with him, treating them, and giving them a taste for liquor. And the village saloon, the "cross-road doggery," is more than anything else the cause of the trouble. All the dangers of drink to the white man api)ly with added force to the negro. And while these i)ositive reasons exist in the South for increasing the severity of the liquor laws, the negative fact that the tide of immigration from Europe sets comparatively little in that direction removes a source of powerful resistance to such legislation. The negro vote has a tendency to be " wet,'' though the anti-liquor agitation is carried on among the coloured peoi)le with not a little success ; but where the whites api)roach to unanimity, as perhaps they sometimes do on this (juestion in rural counties, they generally prevail. In the larger centres of population the white vote is generally divided, and here the negro vote carries no little weight. In the great local option campaign in Atlanta it was canvassed with much vigour on both sides. To return to the variations of detail in the ai)[)lication of * The ratio of prisoners charged with homicide, per million of the population, was stated in 1890 as follows : — North Atlantic States ... ... ... ... 62 North Central „ 80 South Atlantic ,, 123 South Central ,, 232 56 American Liquor Laws. the direct veto. The power of initiation — the riglit of requiring tliat a vote he taken — rests usually with a certain number or ])roportion of the voters in the area of adoption, who signify their demand to the proper authorities. The fre([uency of the elections is usually limited by a provision that the decision adopted at one election shall not be (questioned by a subse- quent election until after the lapse of a certain time, usually two, three, or four years."^ In Massachusetts, however, and in one or two States in the South (Arkansas, for example), it is a strict re(|uirement of the law that the question of " licence '' or " no licence " shall be [)ut and voted on regularly every year ; and until an athrmative vote has been given no licences can be issued. In the rural parts of Illinois there is no requirement to take an annual vote, but licences are not allowed to be issued except in pursuance of a i)etition from a majority of the voters. In such cases local option takes a form the converse of the direct veto, and has an exceptionally restrictive aspect. But the principle is not always applied through the medium of a direct popular vote. In some cases it has (^uite a real, though an indirect, enforcement through the agency of a licensing authority elected on this particular issue— a board of l<'.xcise Commissioners as they are usually called. This is the method adopted in New \'ork State and in Nebraska, and it has 'ts advocates who deem it to be a more efficient method of apply- ing popular opinion to the (question of the grant of licences than that by the direct vote, t It is certainly the fact that a good many instances could be given of places where an existing local option law of the usual type has been neglected, and licences have simply been refused by the local licensing authority. In some States municipal and other local authorities are allowed a wide discretionary power of prohibiting or regulating the lic[uor traffic, unfettered by the general laws of the State. This method prevails throughout California, which gives * III Rhode Island a vote may be taken yearly, f See p. 255 (Nebraska). Local Opjiox. 57 practically complete autonomy in the matter to counties, and even to\vnshii).s.'^ In a good many States, city councils are allowed, within certain limits defined by the general law, to l)ass ordinances regulating the drink traffic, and, in particular, to raise the licence fees above the fixed minimum. f \\\ the South, wide powers of this kind are sometimes conferred by special statutes, either incorjiorating municipalities with general powers of self-government, or relating exclusively to licpior. :]" Sometimes the local veto may be put in force in country districts by a direct vote, and, in incorporated municipalities, by the local authority. ,^ Again, to take another type of local option, the popular judgment is sometimes taken, not upor. the general (piestion, but upon the (Question of the issue of a licence to a [)articular person. In this case the api)licant, before he can obtain his licence, has to ])ioduce a petition signed by a certain number of persons, sometimes even by a majority of all the voters in the election district or licensing area. This is ine case (for example) in the rural i)orlions of Missouri and Nebraska, in Florida and several of the southern States, and in Ontario. There are instances where, under special legislation, the su|»- port of two-thirds of the freeholders within the licensing area or within three miles of the premises is made re([uisite.[| This obligation to obtain a me s"re of popular support as a condition precedent to the obtaining of a licence has sometimes a modi- fied recognition in cities, and the api)lication is re(iuired to be supported by a petition from a cert;.in number or, sometimes, from the majority, of the owners or occu[)iers of premises in the same block, or in that portion of it which fronts upon the same * See p. 308. One or two counties and some thirty or forty small towns and districts in California are under prohibition (pp. 313-314). t In Wisconsin the fees can bt ...sed l)y a direct popular vote. .St^ p. 295. X Georgia, pp. 317-318. § Ohio, pp. 279 280. II Georgia, p. 318. 5« American Liquor Laivs. street.* The law of Nova Scotia carries this kind of local option to an unusual length, requiring every applicant for a retail licence to have the support of two-thu'ds (in Halifax, three-fifths) of the ratei)ayers' in the polling district. In New Brunswick one-third is substituted for two-thirds ; but a licence cannot be granted if the majority of the ratepayers in the city, town, or parish petition against it.t Sometimes special restrictions are set on the opening of liquor shops near churches and schools. In Arkansas a majority of the voters, within three miles of a church or school, may by petition call on the county court to prohibit the sale of licjuor within that area for two years. The object of the foregoing paragraphs is not so much to present a complete summary of the various local option laws (in which respect they would be found deficient), as to indicate generally the variety of forms in which the popular will is re(iuired or empowered to intervene between the licjuor- seller and his licence. The laws themselves, or a comi)lete analysis of them, can readily be obtained in other works :J several of them also are summarised with some detail in subse(|uent chapters of this volume. Upon the important cjuestion of the enforcement of local option in places which vote 'dry," it is difficult to generalise. While it is true that this system has the merit of enabling prohibition to be adopted just where it is possible to enforce it, this does not prevent the drinking portion of the community in places which have given a " no licence " vote from taking * See Missouri, p. 268 ; Denver, p. 307 ; San Francisco, p. 310 ; Atlanta, p. 327 ; Baltimore, p. 337 : Connecticut, p. 363. t See pp. 401, 403 ; also Quebec law, p. 403 ; Ontario, pp. 404-405 ; and Manitoba, p. 407. X See, for example, the "Cycloixxxlia of Temperance and Prohibition" (Funk and Wagnalls, New York, 1891) under the title "Legislation." A condensed analysis of the liquor statutes in the United States, by Mr. William C. Osborn, appeared in the Harvard Laxo Review for October, 18S8, and was subsequently issued in pamphlet form. Local Option. 59 every means, legal or illegal, open or secret, to get all the li(lLior they want ; and, conseciuently, it by no means follows that the law is well enforced in every place which adopts it. Perhaps it would be difficult to point to any town of consider- able size where " no licence " has as yet been steadily enforced for any length of time, and has ultimately gained a permanent footing, in the face of determined opposition from a strong minority. Cambridge might be (juoted as an instance ; but Cambridge, Somerville, and Chelsea are in fact suburbs of Boston, and it is difficult to gauge how matters would stand if it were not for that proximity, or if Boston (as seems not altogether unlikely) should some day vote " no licence." So far as I am aware, the safeguard of recjuiring a two-third majority before the local veto can be put in force nowhere appears in American legislation, though instances of such a requirement, as a condition precedent to the issue of a licence, have been already referred to. I often put the c^uestion of enforcement in a general form in reference to some individual State, and the usual answer was that the local option law was made effective in those places in which the local sentiment was sufficiently strong in its favour. Such places are generally of a rural character, and I think that, so far as the South is concerned, this law may be said to give satisfaction on the whole in rural areas. It is not pretended that it has much effect as regards those who will take the trouble to provide themselves with liquor at their homes ; but, on the whole, outside the towns the demand is not verygreat, and the closing of the village saloons appears to be considered as generally beneficial. The case of Atlanta* is a notable instance of an attempt to establish local prohibition in a large southern town ; and while dissatisfaction is no doubt still felt and ex- pressed in some (quarters with the present state of affairs in Atlanta, there is, I believe, little prospect, so far at least as the * See pp. 321-326. 6o American Liquor La II s. - r fuune ,.s concerned, of a departure from the existing licence la« for winch a constdernble measure of .success is claimed 1 1'o druggist difficulty has been seriously felt l.oth in Massa 1, , ?'■, ""'^'*^'"'''' ''"■'■l'"^'-'^' 1''-'^ i"d»<^ed not a {... and all otl,er purposes whatevcr-a course which may he „rar ue applied to a large area. Boston, with its high returns of arrests for drunkenness, and ts lugi, percentage of non-residents among those arrested furmshes a striking illustration of the effect of local oL,' 6i CHAPrER V. i' HICIH-LICEXCK AND NUMERICAL LIMIIATION. The adoption of high-licence as a means for regulating the drink traffic is of com})aratively recent date. Nebraska appears to have been its birthplace, or, at all events, the i)lace of its first elevation to the rank of a general State law. Since 1881, and down to the present time, it has in an increasing degree found favour with American legislators ; and it has now, in different forms and varying degrees, a place in the laws of many States. Indications of its probable further extension are not wanting."^ 'I'he agitation for its adoption in New Vork State has been in progress for some years, and has, indeed, on more than one occasion been defeated only by the api)lication of the Governor's veto to a measure which had received the assent of both Houses of the Legislature. In San l-'rancisco, which 01 all American cities is the most thickly sown with saloons, a movement for high-licence has shown itself, and seems to be gaining strength. In the accumulating mass of special legisla- tion in the southern States the same tendency is rei)eatedly apparent, and is sometimes pushed to evidently prohibitory lengths. And States which have made trial of this system do not, as far as I am aware, generally show signs of desiring to abandon it. It has roused the keen hostility of many prohibitionists — indeed, it may be said, of the prohibition party generally — • though there are exceptions. It is objected to by them on general moral grounds, as being (iji common with all licensing measures! ) a compromise with sin, and on the ground that * In the present year the fee for retail licences in Washinj^ton, D.C, has been raised fruin $100 to $400. t It is strange to note liow fre(iuently in prohibitionist literature Hccnsing laws are denounced on the ground that they lc<^alise the liquor traffic — as if 62 AAfERiCAX Liquor Laws. it has the special vice of corrupting the public mind with a large revenue. There is, i)erhaps, nothing else in the whole range of the li(|Uor laws which many of them hold in such abhorrence ; for they regard it as the most deadly of all obstacles to prohibition. " Until the high-licence craze has run itself out," said a late candidate of that party for the Presidency, " there is little to be hoped for by prohibitionists." I may summarise in a few sentences the views of a prohibitionist with whom I had some conversation on the subject of high-licence, and whose utterances may, I think, be taken as fairly representative from this point of view. High- licence (he said) is a device of the longer-headed among the liquor men, invented after the strong tendency exhibited during the 'seventies towards prohibition. If this continued, they saw their business doomed. They therefore warned the Republican party that a change of front was necessary, and high-licence was the policy adopted. The prohibitionists were flattered with the assurance that it was a step in their direction. The rank and file of the liquor men, at first opposed to it, found in it their ally, and are become its staunch supporters. Its effect has been to strengthen the trade ; because the elimination of the poorer and weaker traders has concentrated the business in the hands of those who are best qualified to work it for their own advantage, and confirms the political position of the saloon. High-licence (he urged) does not of itself, in the long run, even reduce the number of saloons ; in places where the adoption of the system was at first succeeded by a large diminution of licences, the number has since shown a constant tendency to rise again. It is plausibly argued that a reduction the traffic were the olilsprinf; of these laws, and would not have had any lawful existence without them. Whether or not prohibition is preferal)le on moral or practical grounds to licensing is a question on which it is no the purpose of this book to formulate any definite conclusion. But to say that a law — placing under exceptional restrictions a business which, in the absence of special legal restraint, would be free to all the world — "legalises" that business is clearly not quite correct. High- LICENCE and Numerical Limitation. 63 ^ in the number of licences will reduce the volume of drinking ; but this he declared to be untrue, or, at all events, untrue in towns and centres of i)opulation, which nre the [joints at which the evil is really urgent. The brewers and distillers arc themselves favourable to high-licence ; their trade is not i-estricted in (juantity, while they have a better and more solvent, though a less numerous, circle of customers among the retail traders. But the most insidious and the most dangerous result of liigh-licence is the api)eal which it makes to the sordid interests of the taxpayer, and the additional and most powerful barrier which consecjuently it thrusts in the path of the temperance reformer. A city having a high-licence law makes millions of dollars by the licence fees. In l^oston those fees pay the whole cost of the police force, and in other cities, where the number of licences is less strictly limited than in Pjoston, the profits are yet greater. The loss of revenue is a potent argument against any plan involving material curtailment of the liquor trade which the deluded temperance reformers may propose, when the imposture of the high-licence system has made itself manifest to them. This, perhaps, is a fair summary of the prohibitionists' argument against high-licence. Their objections to it amount to these : that it does not diminish drinking, and, in the long run, does not even materially curtail the number of drink-shops ; that the actual commercial strength of the trade is increased by it; that it increases the political power of the saloon with all its corrupting influences ; and that it sets up a new obstacle to true reform by api)ealing to the sordid interests of the taxpayer. The plea that it is supported by manufacturers and sellers of intoxicating liquor, and must therefore be injurious to temperance, is a favourite one with some prohibitionists, who assume that the promotion of drunkenness must be a design as well as a result of the trade. It is certainly true that brewers and distillers in Nebraska, and, probably, in other high-licence States, have spoken in favour of the system as an alternative 64 Ai^iERicAN Liquor Laws. and a practical bar to [jrohihition, and have declared that their business had not in fact been injured by it ; but it would be goini,^ too far to assert that it was favoured in a general way by the majority of those interested in the trade. A j)erusal of the Wine and Spirit Gazette and ihc B reivers' Journal \\o\\\d lead to the oi)])osite conclusion, though, undoubtedly, as an altcrna- ti\c to jjrohibition, high-licence would find favour in these (|uarters in cases where choice had to be made between the two. Some among the large dealers, also, would probably be glad to sec their smaller rivals driven out by an increased fee. And just as it is said that high licence must be bad because it has received support from the liijuor trade, so it is argued that the op|)osition of the trade to prohibitory laws is the best proof of their excellence. It will, however, 'perhaps be generally admitted that, whether prohibition be effective or ineffective as a measure designed for the [)ublic welfare, it can hardly be expected to receive supi)ort from the persons carrying on the trade which is outlawed by it, even if they fmd means to carry it on in the face or behind the back of the law.'^' 'I'he advantages claimed for high-licence traverse most of the objections of the prohibitionists. Reserving, for the moment, the (pieslion of its effect on the general amount of drinking and drunkenness, I may summarise in a few lines the good results alleged to proceed from it. They are, briefly : — First and foremost, the extinction of a great number of the worst and lowest dramshops, sinks of vice, and hotbeds of crime. Secondly, better police control, owing to the diminution of 'numbers and the concentration (to some extent) of the trade in the business centre of the town, where it is most profitable. Thirdly, better observance of the law by licence-holders, from fear of the pecuniary loss involved in the forfeiture of their licences. Fourthly, suppression of unlicensed liciuor-sellers by * Indications, indeed, are nc* rdtogelher wanting of adisjwsition among li([uor-sellers to aajuiesce in a prohibitory law which they are able to violate with impunity. Sec Iowa, p. 167. JIlCIhl.lCI.NCE .IAD AfMJ.Rir.i/. LliMITATlOA, ^'5 the licensed, as an a( t of selt'i^rotcetion. riltlily, contraction of tlie saloon inllueiicc in local and State jiolitics. As already noted, it is sometimes denied that, in the long run, the high-licence fee has nnu h effect on the number of licences issued. 'I'he case of IMainfield (New Jersey) has been rei)eatedly to PopuU* I to 2CX) (Jliicago, liowever, thougli it does show an appreciable falling off in the number of dramshops, is a weak instance. It is often cited as an example of the failure of high-licence, but it is hardly a fair exam[)lc : an immense and rich popula- tion, largely of foreign origin and, i)erhaps, somewhat reckless character; a licensing authority which exercises no discretionary l)ower worth mentioning, and a licence fee which, after all, ought hardly to be called " high " in such a place, just one-half of what is paid in Omaha or St. Paul, much smaller cities. Let us see what has been the effect in them of high-licence. Year. 1 88 1 1882 1891 OMAHA. Licence Fee. 100 1,000 1,000 I'roi)orlion of Licences to population. I to 267 I to 560 I to 6co 1886 1888 1892 ST. PAUL. 100 1,000 1,000 I to 152 I to 318 I to 368 Ic c. e, a- ss ry 1, .If IS. /ficir-r.icrxcr. an/^ XuM/:RfC.\L /jmi / .ir/iKX. (yi Instances might easily l)«j multi|)liud of individual places and of whole States where similar results are shown as directly due to this system. In other cases the elimination of dram- shops has been carried to a still further extent by the action of high-licence combined with other more direct modes of limitation, which will presently be noticed. High-licence is a somewhat indefmite term ; there are many gradations ])ctween the highest and the lowest ; and a rate high enough to supi)ress a large proportion of the applications for hcences in one place will have comparatively little effect in another. But that a material increase in the rate of taxation has in general a marked effect on the number of tax])ayers, is a proposition for which corroborative evidence is not wanting.* That such an effect is in itself desirable is, I think, the opinion of a large majority of .\mericans who take an interest in the li(juor (juestion ; that it is the strongest argument for high- licence is probably the opinion of most of those who favour that system, for it is urged that the smaller and [)oorer saloons which disappear under it are precisely those which do the most mischief. To the objection that the jwor and not the rich are interfered with, it is answered that it is the poor themselves who are most benefited by the disappearance of the low dram- shops. The directly restrictive effects of high-licence are less marked in crowded centres of poi)ulation, than in more sparsely populated areas where the trade is smaller and, there- fore, less able to bear a heavy tax ; and it often operates with prohibitive force in rural districts.! For the same reason it tends to drive the trade out of the outlying and residential ({uarters of cities and to concentrate it in the business quarter, where probably it may . . ;e little or no effect in diminishing the number of saloons. I'lom a police point of * See a/so Minnesota, ji. 250; Illinois, \). 295. t See Nebraska, pp. 254-5. V 2 r)S .Iv/-:a'/ XcM /:/<:/< A/. f./M/r \tj<>x. V Stale and |)arlly lo llic couiily ; Inil this jjiovision was amended, and now llie city takes four rdtlis, the ( ngland, where a portion of the tax might be ai)i)ro[)riated by the central gcnernment for imjjerial purjioses, in which the individual taxjjayer would feel his pocket to be less intimately ccjncerned. In rural clistric ts and small country towns these considera- tions have less im))ortanc(,', because the expenses of local government are lighter than in c itics ; and the experience c)f the southern States shows that high lic:ence is not antagc;nistic (at all events utside the more impcjrtant centres of po])ul;'.tion) to a free use of the [jov/crs of loc ;il |)rcjhibilion. Jt sometimes hapi)ens, indeed, that the lie cnc c fee itself is deliberately made prcjhibitory. There are counties in the South in which the fee has been fixed at 5,000 and even 10,000 dollars.! * A division wliicli llic cily > ciiitriii|il;iti"s w'lli niiu- , to I'dpilliltinll. I tu — I Iniiik cinu'ss, cti.* I t(. — ('aint)ri(l^;c (70,000) [Proliibilioiil S()imi\ille (40,100) ,, Ponlaiid ( (fi,.(i)')) ,, Council I'l tilts (?r,soo) ... ., I)..ll,irs. llo.ston (443,500) 1,000 to I,5;(ir; 500 (beer) 3<« (grocers) I'hil.'ulclphia (1,047,030),. i,ofK) I'itlslnir^ (.?:58,6oo) 1,000 St. Paul (n;i, 000) 1,000 Miimeaiiolis (16;, 000) ... i,oto.T5 J.) » 40 -•4 l> 3' 14 5110 (all kiiuls, e.v- i.lt , 9 cept druggists i.*v clubs) 1 754 (retail) •t" 20 about 800 (rel.iil) II) 12 3.}o (al' kindsl ^54 \ 25 601 (all kinds) 77 28 560 (all kinds) 84 19 886 (all kinds) 5 420 (retail) 122 22 160 (retail) IS 24 about 23^ (ret.iil) 53 20 about .■'»! (ret.iil) 30 iS 3 ?7 (retail only) 25 i.> 247 (ret.iil) 8i§ 26§ 207 (retail) .h) 14 about r ^6 (ret.iil) 66 iS i6q (all kinds) 43: 17 2' K) (retail) 65 18 2o'i (all kinds) 36 32 94 (retail) 211 in K.iii..,,| I . I'r. I to — 824 I , ( K X J 467 544 748 732 40S 56., ,S49 .S79 fii2 94" sS3 632 4 1.3 544 611 Returns are ditTerently made up in different jilaces. " I )runkenness " in this coliinin includes offences in which drunkenness is stated as ;m element ('.<••) "common drnnkards" and "drunk and disorderly"). In sn:ne cities (('.j,'., Minne.-ipolis, Cincinnati, i'lttsburn, and Si. Louis) there is a return of " disorderly." but not of "drunk ;ind disoriKrly." In such cases I have t.iken three-fourths of the "disorderly" offemesto be due to drink, and have included that proportion in the compntalion of this column. The returns are not all for the s.'inie year. I have in all cases taken the last year for which I had the fimires, v.-iryinj.; from 1890 to i8cj2, and h.ave taken the iiopiilation as given in the census of 1H90, since which time there must have been in some 'ases a considerable increase. t The conditicMis of iioston are peculiar, si\- pp. 60, 221-2. % The fi>:ines for Chicago are t;iken on the year 1890, when there were about 5,500 tlrnmshops. There are now over 7.000. No returns are published in Chicauo for drunken- ness ; the figures in the fourth column give the ratio of " disorderly " to po|)nlation. The large majority of them wen; tloubtless more or less under the inlhieiirf! of lii|uor, though iiriibabK' not all. Put nearly 2, mo intoxicated jiersons were assisted home by the police in ( hic.igo in 1890. S '! he return of arrests in Indiana))olis, on wliii h the .ibove figures are based, is for ten months only (March — December, 1891). I have assumed a proportion.'ite ninnber for the other two months. |i New \'ork shows 15,730 .irrests for " disorderly conduct," but I hnvo not included them, ;is it has also a return of arrests fur " intox ic.it ion ;md disirdei !y < ondm t." .is well as for " into.vic.ition " simply. •' Those v.hose business amounts to ^15,000 (ler i|iiaiter are leqiiired to pay the higher lee. .As a matter of fact, nearly all the dranishoj)s pay on the lower scale. 74 , / Ml: R n ^,\^ 1. 1< ) I ■( 'A' L. \ ws. The twenty-three ( ities comprised in the tal)le inehide a maj(jrity of the largest cities in tlie country and a few smaller ones. If 500 dollars he taken as the low-water mark of hij^h- licencx*, they may be thrown into three groups, vi/. \ — 4 |)r{)hi!)ition ( ities. 1 1 high-licence ,, 8 low licence ,, Turning to the fourth (H)lumn of the tahle, we Hnd that 1 1 of these places have a lower ratio of arrests for drunkenness to population than 1 to 40, while i 1 have a ratio of i to 40 or a higher ratio, the distribution among the three groups being as follows ; — l-uw k;itic) ijf Airt.sl> Hi 'li Ratio uf AiiLst^. Piohihilioii : Cambridge . Hii^h-Licciuc : Si. ran! Mimienpolis ( )maha Kansas City Detroit St. Louis Loiv-I.iit'ucc : Indianapolis Cincinnati New \ ork Charleston Prohibilion : Somerville Tort land Council IilulTs llii^h-Liccnce : 15oston I'hiladelpliia I'ittsburg Chicago Loxv-Liioicc : Providence lialtimore Hnjoklyn Son Francisco !. II II I leave the reader to draw from this nnnlysis and from the table any conclusions which they may ajjiiear to him to warrant. I do not suggest that they supply any argimient in favour of either high-licence or prohibition. So fai .is 1 am aware, the particular cities included in the table are as fairly rejuesenlalive as any others would be. At all events, they were not >ele< led lor the i)urpose of prosing or disproving anything. I'he Ifir.n-i.ii Eh'CE AXD Numerical I.imi i a now 75 \ conditions of Cambridge and Somcrvillo ai)[)car l(j be very similar. I'.olh arc sul)iirl)s of IJoston, atid botii have licld consistently to |)rohibitioii for a considerable series of years. Vet their relurns ol arrests for drunkenness differ in the pro- portion of more than two to (Mic. Of the state of affairs in Portland and Coi"K;il IMuffs a particular account is given in other pages. "^' In Tortland the number of i)ers()ns arrested for drunkenness during the year ending March, i. 257. § Massacluisctls, |)p. 195, 221 2. II (;eori;ia, pp. 32S 9. 76 Am /.NIC. IN LiiH ■( 'A- /.-; // w. on whicli I addressed many iiKiuiries in all i)arts of the country ; and I do not hesitate to sa\ that ai.iong all the persons of different classes— clergynien. judges, lawyers, officials, business men, police, and others with whom I talked on the subject, putting aside those who either were interested in the trade, or else were extreme and uncompromising advocates of i)ro- hibition, the great majority favoured high-licence as a measure of regulation ; by which I mean, not that they necessarily preferred it to the total exclusion of the traffic where it could be excluded, but that, believing general i)rohibition to be impracticable, they found in high-licence the most satisfactory metlKxl of dealing with the business wherever it existed. ■**■ That there were excei)ti(Mis I do not deny ; but I have no doubt — • so far as my iiKiuiries went how the balance of o|)inion lay. Local oi)tion and high-licence- that is to say, prohibition where it can be enforced, and high-licence where it cannot — these are the forms of li(|uor legislation whi( h I found, more than any other, advocated by Americans all over the country. Many also, who either have little belief in, or are actually opposed to, general i)ro- hibition and the local veto, are strong sup|)orters of high-licence. 'I'he general grounds on which it finds favour have already been * Here, l)y way of an example, is my note taken after a conversation with one who held tlie strongest anti-li([uor views, l)iU was not, politically, a prohiiiitionist : — " Mr O is a teetotaller, and would like prohibition if it was effective, hut he is convinced that it is worse than useless. He thinks hit^hdicence the best check, and I gather that he would make it very high indeed ; he meiuioned $5,000 for this city- He advocates high-lieence for the sake of reducing the number to the lowest point possible. 'I he real evil, he says, is the teni|>tation to the young who haven't yet developed a thirst for strong drink. They go and i)lay billiards together, and gradually get to playing for drinks. Therefore make the number of lifjuor shops as small as you can. As for preventing peojjle who want drink from getting it, it is utterly impossible, at all events till the mass of habits and of sentiment has undergone a great change, which can only be the result of time. If the rising generation c(;idd be kept clear of getting the taste, a general prohibitory law miglit be passed a generation hence, an> °w /A ;w ^j 82 American Liquor^Laws. purpose of dealing with api)lications for licences. This is the course taken in New York State (except in the cities), where it operates as a local option measure, licences being altogether refused in a good many townships, in which the Excise ('om- missioners are elected on that issue. In the cities of this State, however, the commissioners are nominated by the mayor, an arrangement open to much of the objection felt to the exercise of the licensing power directly by the municipality. lUit, in some cases, the principle of popular control has been given \\\) altogether so far as licensing is concerned, that duty being committed to officers appointed by the (iovernor of the State, to whom also is still more frecjuently entrusted the control of the police. This course has been adopted in iJoston, where the police board is the licensing authority, and in Baltimore, where the Governor appoints three Licence Com- missioners.* In St. Louis, public opinion, long dissatisfied with the municipal control, has just succeeded in obtaining a similar change. The system, though obnoxious to the prin- ciples of local self-government, is generally accepted as a relief after the grave practical inconveniences which it was designed to remove. I'^inally, there remains the plan of committing the duty to judicial hands, as is done under the Hrooks Law in Pennsylvania, where the licensing authorities are the judges of the Courts of Quarter Sessions. The importance of the cjuestion, to what authority should be entrusted the performance of this duty, depends much on the extent of the discretionary powers to be attached to it. In Ohio anyone who pays the tax may keep a dramshop, and there is, properly speaking, no licensing power. In other places * The " metropolitan " system of police management has been adopted in a good many cities besides Boston ; among them, Cincinnati and St, Lours. In prohilntion States there is commonly a power to appoint a spscial police for enforcing prohibition ; and in Connecticut and several of the Canadian Provinces s})ecial officers are entrusted with the execution of the liquor laws. See pp. 365, 384, 400, 403, 407. Some Details. 83 (Chicago for example) tlie power to refuse applications exists only where the ap[)licant's character is unsatisfactory, and [)rac- tically is not exercised except in rare cases, the nuinicipality granting a licence to almost anyone who is ready to pay the fee. Where the power of veto is to be exercised by the licensing authority, there are evident advantages in having a body specially constituted by popular election, so that the princi[)' of local option may be maintained. l>ut, where local oi)lion either does not exist, or operates by means of the direct popular veto, and the licensing authority is intended to exercise discretion in the grant and refusal of individual applications for licences, there is force in the argument that those who are clothed with such [)owers ought to be free from external influences, and above all from the danger of jiressure through the votes or manieuvres of persons interested. And on this ground the adoption of a nominated or judicial licensing board receives support in many quarters in preference to one dependent on a poi)ular vote. The chief merit claimed for the present law of Peimsylvania is the strength and indepefuience of the licensing courts. Those courts have acted with much energy in dealing with applications and reducing the whole number of licences, and appear on the whole to have fulfilled the expectations of those who promoted the passing of the Brooks Law, though it is said that there has recently appeared a disposition to somewhat greater laxity, and some of the Judges, I believe, would gladly be relieved of this duty. On the whole, perhaps, it may be said that no American licensing bodies have done their work more efficiently or given more general satisfaction than the (Quarter Sessions Judges of Pennsylvania. Both in Philadelphia, however, and other places I found a disposition in some quarters to consider that the selection, from among a long list of ai)plicants, of those to whom a limited number of licences should be granted was a system of necessity invidious and unfair, and that the better [)lan would be to settle^ — whether by decision of the licensing court or by c; 2 84 A.uEKh:A\ Liquor Lai^s. popular vote — the whole number of licences to be issued, and to let them be offered at auction, or assigned by lot, or in any other way rather than by selection. Such a plan, however, has not, so far as I am aware, ever been adopted or even much pressed, and I need not further allude to it in connection with American laws.* On the assumption that the licensing authority is to have discretionary power to grant or refuse applications, those who favour the view that such a power is better vested in an independent than in a local elective body may fairly claim support from American precedents.! And this view is not in- consistent with the acceptance of the principle of local option through the direct popular veto, or, indeed, with the further extension of that principle to the determination of the licence fee, and a limitation on the total number of licences. 'J'he i)owcr of refusing api)lications for licences varies in different States ; sometimes (as already mentioned) they can be refused only for cause, such as bad character or previous convic- tion, but in the majority of cases the power is a wide one ; and, where poi)ular sentiment requires or allows it, it is often exer- cised with great freedom. In Massachusetts a case is mentioned of a town where all applications for licences were refused, though the local option election had given a majority for "licence." And, as noticed in Chapter IV., much attention is commonly paid (whether by rec|uirement of law or as a matter of practice) to the wishes of the public in dealing with a])plications. In some cases a licence is not to be given unless the licensing authority is satisfied that it is required for the accommodation of the public ; and in Pennsylvania this question is to be deter- mined with due regard to the number and character of the petitioners for and against the application. | In Michigan, * The " single tax " law of Ohio finds favour in some (iuarteis, on the ground that the absence of any iliscretionary power to grant or refuse licences rids that State of a dangerous inducement to political corruption. t Sec also Ontario, p. 384. ; Baltimore, p. ^,1^ ; Pennsylvania, p. 226 ; Kentucky, p. 347. S<\uE Dr/r.MLS. 85 there is, in form, no licence ; but the liquor-seller must first pay the required tax and enter into the reciuired i)ond, ai)proved by the local authority, which api)roval is to be withheld if he is known to be one whose character and habits would render him an unfit person to conduct the business of li(|uor selling. The fre(|uent reciuirement of support from tiie public or the occupiers of neighbouring premises to ap})lications for licences has been noticed in Chapter IV., in connection with the subject of local option.* Frecjuently, also, it is forbidden to issue a licence for premises within a certain distance of a church or school.! As regards the licences themselves and the limitations attached to them, there is also much variety. Some laws make no distinction between wholesale and retail, "on" and "off;" but fix a single fee, and a single course of procedure in all cases. Massachusetts, on the other hand, has six different classes of licence ; and other States classify to some extent, and fix their fees at varying rates, according to the class of licence. The feeling of antagonism to the mere dramshop has led to the reciuirement in some laws that all licensees shall provide a certain amount of sleeping accommodation,:!; or at least food as well as drink.^ In one case it has even been sought to abolish the bar altogether, and allow only sales by the bottle for removal before consumption, and in hotels to gucsts.|| Grocers' licences are sometimes regarded with special dis- favour, as tending to secret drinking, and to the promotion of the habit among women, who procure liquor in the grocery *■ In Missouri, if a petition for a licence is supported l)y two-thirds of the taxpayers, it can be refused only on the ground of cliaracter. In San Francisco the application must he granted if supported by twelve owners of real estate in the same block. t Massachusetts, p. 196 ; Denver, p. 307 ; Georgia, p. 335 ; S. Caro- lina, p. 356 ; New York, p. 360 ; Nova Scotia, ]>. 401. % Ontario, p. 405. 4^ Massachusetts, p. 195. II Nova Scotia, ]i. 401. See also p. 329, for proposal in Georgia to allow only wholesale licences. 86 Amiirivan LinuOR L.xws. when they would he ashamed to enter a saloon. The feeling in sonic quarters is extremely strong against the " corner grocery." i^Aidence of its mischievous effects was given before the Royal Commission sitting in Montreal.* The obligation on grocers to sell by the bottle only, for consumption off the ])remises, has been found to be greatly violated in some places, and much dram-drinking is said to go on in these shops. In Pennsylvania grocers' licences are prohibited. In Ontario the grant of off-licences can be limited by municipal bye-law to those whose business is solely the selling of liquor. The licence money, or the greater part of it, is most com- monly appro[)riated by the municipal or other local authority of the area in which the licence is granted ; but a portion of it is in many cases reserved to the State and sometimes also to the county. In Ohio the greater part of the tax is divided among certain county and local funds in specified proportions. In \\'isconsin the licence fees are appropriated for the support of the poor.t American liquor laws invariably require the licensee, in addi- tion to the payment of the fee, to give a heavy bond with sureties by way of security for his compliance with the conditions of his licence. The amount is commonly $i,ooo, sometimes less, sometimes much more. The law of Michigan allows the local authority to fix it anywhere between $3,000 and $6,000. In Pennsylvania and Minnesota it is $2,000 ; in Illinois, $3,000 ; in Nebraska $5,000. The sureties are generally required to be freeholders of the same city or county, and, as a check on the multiplication of "tied houses," it is sometimes provided that no one may be surety on more than one bond. |. In Penn- sylvania no one engaged in the manufacture of liquor is eligible. * Sec also, as to groceries in San Francisco, pp. 311, 312, +• In some Stales the licensee has to pay an additional ad valorem tax on the turn-over of bis business. X Nebraska, p. 253 ; Connecticut, p. 364. A similar provision was proposed in Pennsylvania, l)ut was struck out of the Bill. ( SoflfE Dr.TAirs. 87 Sureties occasionally find their liability to be a serious matter, when their j^rincipal has been cast in heavy damages under the "civil damage clause," presently to be noticed.* Under at least one law, on proof of any breach of the conditions of the bond, the whole amount of it is declared to be li(iuidated damages, and is recoverable by action on behalf of the local authority.! In Texas the sum of 8500 is recoverable on the bond on breach of any condition. Licensees who fail to obey the law are commonly liable to forfeiture of their licences and to future disqualification, in addition to other penalties. U^he licensing authority, as well as the legal tribunals, has often a power to cancel a licence on being satisfied that the liability to forfeiture has been incurred, J: and in some cases is required to do so.;^ In Wisconsin, on sworn complaint that a licence-holder has violated the law, the licensing authority has no option, but is required to summon the person charged, hear the evidence, and on i)roof of the offence revoke the licence, whereupon the offender is discjualified for a year from obtaining another. In some cases the court convicting of a particular offence is required to declare the licence forfeited. 1 1 In others, when the court has convicted, the question of forfeiture is left at the * The full liability of the sureties to the extent of the bond seems to be established by a number of legal decisions. They have been held liable for exemplary as well as compensatory damatres. t Atlanta, p. 327. See also Rhode Island, p. 184. X Sec Illinois, p. 287 ; Minnesota, p. 240. In Rhode Island the licensing authority may cancel a licence on being satisfied that the licensee has allowed his premises to become disorderly, so as to annoy and disturb his neighbours. § Baltimore, p. 337 ; Missouri, p. 269. il Pennyslvania, p. 227. Missouri, p. 269. The holder of a beer licence in Illinois, on conviction of selling other liquor, is thereupon to forfeit his licence ; and the court must declare the forfeiture. In Rhode Island a licensee convicted of illegal selling forfeits his licence and is disqualified for five years ; and the local authority is required to bring suit for the amount of his bond. See also Atlanta, pp. 327-8, and i\ 420 (s. 909 of Atlanta ordinance). 88 American Liquor Laivs. discretion either of tlie court* or of the licensing aiitliority.t In Minnesota, the licence becomes ipso facto void on convic- tion for selling to a minor, habitual drunkard, or intemperate person after notice. In Ontario a licence is in general revocable after a third conviction. A [)erson who has been convicted within a year, or within three or five years, of any breach of the licjuor laws is in some States ineligible for a new licence.::: In Atlanta such a convic- tion involves perpetual disqualification ; every applicant for a licence being retjuired to make an affidavit that he has not l^reviously been convicted. And in Missouri a licence may not be granted to any one whose licence has previously been revoked, or who has been convicted of any violation of the liquor law, or has had any such person in his employment. Sunday closing is the rule nearly everywhere in America, but it is a rule much violated in the cities, \w many of which nothing more is attcmi)ted than the closing of the front door, while there are some in which not even this form is observed. Complaints that it has been used by the police as a means of levying blackmail have not been infre([uent in some of the larger cities ; and in others, where the police would seem to have done their best to enforce it, the difficulty of obtaining convictions is said to have rendered their exertions useless.;:^ Boston and Philadelphia, however, are instances among the larger cities where the law is administered with vigour and not without success. In Atlanta, also, I believe it to be well enforced. The law of Massachusetts allows an exception in favour of guests in hotels; but in Pennsylvania the rule is absolute, and is not openly disobeyed in Philadelphia. The law of Ontario forbids the sale of liquor between 7 o'clock on Saturday evening and 6 o'clock on Monday morning, during which period bar-rooms must be closed. * Massachusetts, pp. 197, 210. t Nebraska, p. 253 ; Massachusetts, pp. 197, 210. X Minnesota, p. 239 ; Rhode Island, p. 184. ij ScCy as to Cincinnati, p. 282. "--L Some Details. 89 The closin^L,' of bar-rooms on election days is general. Liquor is never allowed to be sold to minors,* or to habitual drunkards. There is, perhaps, no provision in the licence laws to which Americans generally attach more im- portance than this, or whic-h there is a greater disjjosition to enforce with severity. This is the point to which the Law and Order Leagues common in American cities devote the best part of their energies, and their attention to which earns for them the largest measure of public favour. Tiie Chicago League attempts nothing else but a vigilant campaign against all who supi)ly drink to young people and to drunkards. Li Atlanta every saloon is oi)liged to have posted over the door the words "No minors allowed in here." To employ a minor in a dram- shop, or even to permit him to frequent or enter it without the written permission of his parent or guardian, is equally prohibited. The penalties for this class of offence are severe. In Mis- souri the fine ranges from $50 to $200, and, in addition, the parent may recover damages to the extent of $50 for each of- fence. This provision is no dead letter ; and it happened while I was in Kansas City that a woman there obtained judgment for $2,000 against a saloon keeper for supplying licjuor to her son, a lad. 7'he offence was alleged, and proved, to have been committed on forty different occasions. The secretary of the Law and Order League of a large city in another State related to me a case where a woman got a verdict for $6,500 in a similar case, proving sixty-five offences, for each of which she was entitled to $100, the amount fixed by law. The convic- tion in that case was quashed, on the ground that the statute of limitations had run ; but the law was afterwards amended so as to extend the time during which such actions might be brought. In Mic. n both actual and exemp,.iry damages are recoverable by a parent or master for this offence. In California the prohibition extends only up to the age of 18 years. 90 Am/ckkax Liquor Laus. In a few instances the sale to women is also prohibited either altogether, or for consuni])tion on the premises. In Denver a city ordinance provides that licjuor is not to l)e supplied to females, nor may females be permitted to i)e in saloons for the ]nirpose of drinking, or he employed in the litjuor business.* A provision, found in most American laws, for the greater protection of the habitually intemperate, and their families, is that which enables the relations of a drunkard to give notice to li([Uor-sellers that they are not to su])ply him with liquor, and attaches a heavy ])enalty to anyone who violates the terms of the notice within a year. The following, which is taken from the Massachusetts law, may be given as an e\ami)le of such clauses, though they often vary in detail : - "The husband, wife, parent, child, guardian, or employer of a person who has, or may hereafter have, the habit of drinking spirituous or intoxicating lic|uor to excess, may give notice in writing, signed by him or her, to any person, rec|aesting him not to sell or deliver such li(|Uor to the person having such habit. If the person so notified at any time within twelve months thereafter sells or deli\ers any such lic|uor to the person having such habit, or permits such person to loiter on his premises, the person giving the notice may, in an action of tort, recover of the person notified such sum, not less than one hundred nor more than \\\e hundred dollars, as may be assessed as damages : /;7^7'/V/tv/, that an employer giving such notice shall not recover unless he is injured in his person or property. A married woman may bring such action in her own name, and all damages recovered by her shall inure to her separate use. In case of the death of either party, the action and right of action shall survive to or against his executor or administrator."! In Wisconsin the notice may be given by the munici[)al or Poor Law authorities as a protection to the public against * Ser also RIkkIc Island, p. 183. New York Slate passed a law in 1892 pi"oliil)iting tlie omploymcnl of women as barmaids. t Under a subsequent enactment the notice may also be given in a city by the mayor, and elsewhere by one of the selectmen. In Rhode Island the limitation on the amount of the damages is omitted. See also Pennsylvania, p. 228 ; Missouri, p. 269 ; Kentucky, p. 347 ; Ontario, p. 407. I X\ Some Detait.s. 9' liability for the support of tlic drunkard or his family.* Clauses of this kind have been found to have practical effect ; use has been made of them, and cases in the law courts have tested and established their validity. Their operation is to some extent impeded by an unwillingness to give the notice, and by the difticulty or distastefulness of serving it in a number of saloons. This latter obstacle to the effectiveness of the clause is, however, easily surmounted in places having a Law and Order League, by an application to that body, which is generally ready to undertake the work. The foregoing provision may be considered as part of what is known as the Civil Damage Law ; but the enactment to which that name is usually given is one which makes the h'quor-seller liable in damages for any injury which a [)crson under the '■ ifluence of liquor supplied by him may do to himself or others. The following is a fair example of such a law :— "Every husband, wife, child, parent, guardian, employer, or other person, who is injured in person, property, or means of sujiport by an intoxicated person, or in consequence of the intoxi- cation, habitual or otherwise, of any person, shall have a right of action in his or her own name, severally or jointly, against any person or persons who, by selling or giving intoxicating liquor, have caused in whole or in part such intoxication. "f The following is another form of clause, less comprehensive than the preceding one : — " If any person in a state of intoxication commits any injury to the person or property of another, the person who furnished him with any part of the liquor which occasioned his intoxication, if the same was furnished in violation of this chapter, shall be liable to the same action by the party injured as the person intoxicated would be liable to ; and the party injured, or his or her legal repre- sentative, may bring either a joint action against the person * See p. 296. t -SVr laws of Illinois and of Massachusetts, Maine, and other States. In Illinois, if the damages claimed do not exceed $200, proceedings for their recovery may be taken before a magistrate. 93 A.VEKJCAX Liquor Laws. intoxic.'ited and the person who furnished the liciuor, or .1 separate action against either."* The law of Ontario, in addition to a clause similar to the last, contains also one in the following terms, dealing with cases where an intoxicated person commits suicide or sustains fiital injury : — " Where in any inn, tavern, or other house or place of public entertainment wherein refreshments are sold, or in any place wherein intoxicating liquors of any kind are sold, whether legally or illegally, any person has drunk to excess of intoxicating licjuor of any kind, therein furnished to him, nd while in a state of intoxi- cation from such drinking has coni. to his death by suicide, or drowning, or perishing from cold or other accident caused by such intoxication, tlic keeper of such inn, tavern, or other house or place of public entertainment, or wherein refreshments are sold, or of such place wherein intoxicating lic|uor is sold, and also any other person or persons who for him or in his employ delivered to such person the licjuor whereby such intoxication was caused, shall be jointly and severally liable to an action as for personal wrong (if brought within three months thereafter, but not other- wise), by the legal representatives of the deceased person ; and such legal representatives may bring either a joint and several action against them, or a separate action against either or any of them, and by such action or actions, may recover such sum not less than $100 nor more than $1,000, in the aggregate, of any such actions, as may therein be assessed by the court or jury as damages. "t The Civil Damage Law of Nebraska is very wide, rendering the liquor-seller responsible for all damages sustained by individuals or the public in consequence of the traffic, in- cluding the support of paupers, widows, and orphans. Thus, if a ])erson becomes a pauper through intemperarce, the Poor Law authorities may sue on the bond of any licensee who was in the habit of supplying him with liquor. And in such suits it is only necessary to prove that the defendant supplied liquor * Laws of Rhode Island. t Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1887, c. 194, s, 122. S(K\/K Dei- AILS. 9;> to the [)crson on tlic day, or about the time, when the acts wore done or the injuries received, wliich gave rise to the suit. In this latter respect Civil 1 )aniage Laws vary, some re(|uiring I)roof that the intoxication was caused l)y drink supphed by the defendant, wliile others merely rcijuire it to be shown that the individual was intoxicated, and that the defendant supplied soinc of the li([uor. In Wisconsin the existing Civil Damage Law operates only in the case of an habitual drunkard in respect of whom notice has been given not to sell, a limitation which is said to render it almost inoperative. In Ohio ther is a similar limitation ; but anyone serving licjuor so as to cause intoxication is liable to com[)ensate one who takes charge of the intoxicated person, a i)rovision which occurs also in the laws of some other States.* Whatever maybe thought of the Civil Damage Law, there is no doubt that it has ojjerated in not a few cases with practical and exemi)lary force. Of its operation in Nebraska something is said in a later chapter.f In other States also I found evidence that it was by no means a dead letter.:,': The Law and Order Leagues are ready to give advice and assistance to persons desiring to take proceedings; and lawyers are not wanting who, from less disinterested motives, are quite willing to i)romote litigation of this kind, in view of the heavy damages * Kansas, p. 129; Iowa, p. 153. + >tv pp. 258-9. I I'or instance, in ^i:t\\ York there was a case where a man, after drinking heavily in a saloon, left with a bottle of whisky in his pocket and a pipe in his mouth. He fell over the kerb-stone, the bottle was broken and the spirit took fire from the pipe. The man lost his life, and a jury awarded his widow heavy damages against the saloon-keeper. Here are some other cases :— " In the suit for $10,000 damages brought by Mrs. E. H. against S. D. V., of , the jury hast night awarded $1,000. Mrs. H.'s husband was killefl some months ago by G. \\, who, it was claimed, was drunk on whisky obtained at V.'s drug store in ." "The ■ County (Pa.) Court has awarded $1,625 damages against J. S., a saloon- keeper of the borough of , on the suit of Mrs. S. W., whose husband, it is cKaimed, got drunk in S.'s saloon, and while drunk was run over by the cars and killed." 94 Amkn/cax Li^n'oii /..ins. to which it may lead. 'I'hc persons entitled to take these pro- ceedings are, in a large i)r()portion of cases, women whose husbands have gone to ruin in the saloons. 'I'he secretary of the League in a large city told me that the reluctance of niany women to follow up their cases was the chief obstacle to the enforcement of this law. A woman would come to the League's oriice, would be prevailed upon to institute i)ro- ( cedings, and afterwards, bullied or [)ersuaded by her husband or others, would abandon them, but, in his opinion, the risk to saloon-keepers was real enough to ojjerate with considerable effect in deterring them from anything likely to bring them within the grasp of the Civil I )amage Law. The penalty for intoxication is commonly a fine with or without liability to imprisonment, but the latter punishment is more often reserved (except in default of payment of the fine) for a second or third conviction ; and, as it is comi)aratively rare for previous convictions to be charg^id and proved, the offender has nearly always the option of a fine. The (jues- tion of the punishment for drunkennes' . s lately received much attention in ALassachusetts, w' ■ ''le fine has been abolished, h'urther reference to this su' jct will be found in Chapter XL"^ The tendency of legislation, however, is to treat the seller of liquor with more severity than the consumer, and accordingly it is sometimes provided that the punishment for drunkenness may be wholly or partly remitted on the offender giving sworn information, when, where, and from whom he received the liquor which made him drunk. f The law of Michigan goes still further, and provides that a person, alleged on sworn informa- tion to have been intoxicated, is to be summoned and called on to give evidence against the liciuor-seller.:}: In several States habitual drunkards may be committed to places established J * Sre p. 211. t .S(V Iowa, p. 152; Nebraska, p. 254; Atlanta, p. 328. ;;: St',' pp. 263 4. Some Details. 95 , for the cure of intemperance. In Massachusetts a special State hospital for the pur[)ose has recently been opened* By the law of lUinois, habitual drunkenness for two years is a cause for divorce, and proceedings can also be taken, as in cases of insanity, for the appointment of a conservator of the person and property of a drunkard. For illegal selling the punishment is generally a heavy line, and imprisonment, under some laws for as much as a year. And the court has sometimes no option but to imprison. In some States the most effective weapon against illicit liciuor shops is found to be the provision declaring every such place to be a nuisance, and authorising proceedings to be taken for an injunction to abate it. 'I'he procedure m these cases is more speedy, and avoids the risks of failure with the jury; and the American courts seem to have supported a wide application of this equitable jurisdiction. The following section is from the law of Massachusetts : — " The Supreme Judicial Court and Superior Court shall have jurisdiction in equity upon information filed by the district attorney for the district, or upon the petition of not less than ten legal voters of any town or city setting forth the f^ict that any building, place or tenement therein, is resorted to for prostitution, lewdness or illegal gaming, or is used for the illegal keeping or sale of intoxicit- mg liquors, to restrain, enjoin, or abate the same as a common nuisance, and an injunction for such purpose may be issued by any justice of said courts.' f j y In Nebraska all fines under the Liquor Law are paid to the School Boards. Vendors of liquor are by many laws recpiired to keep their doors and windows unobstructed by screens or other obstacde to a clear view of the premises from the street. Tables and * Large numbers of persons voluntarily submit themselves for treat mentat " keeley Institutes," and places where other special "cures "are adm.mstered. The Keeley cure, in particular, has spread widely over America. t Sec aho Pennsylvania, p. 228; Kansas, p. 129; Iowa, p. 152. r 96 A.MEK/CAN Liquor Laws. chairs are also in some cases forbidden. CharloUetown, in Prince Edward Island, has a specially stringent law of this kind.-^ 'Hie sale of li([uor in theatres and [)laces of amusement is sometimes forbidden. And some laws prohibit musical and other performances in saloons. In Missouri, a dramshop keej^er may not allow the use of any musical instrument, nor any contests or exhibition on his premises, nor any billiard-table, gaming- table, bowling alley, cards, or dice. In Nebraska "treating" is forbidden, but not prevented. 'I'he sale of lic^uor by druggists for medicinal, mechanical, scientific, and sacramental jnirposes is a matter which has received much legislative attention in America, especially where l)rohibition prevails. The elaborate provisions regulating or attempting to regulate this business in Iowa and Kansas are noticed in the chapters dealing with those States. Commonly, but not invariably, licensing laws provide for the conduct of this business l)y druggists on payment of a reduced fee. Special exemptions are sometimes allowed for medical j)rescrii)tions. Great abuses have gone on in the "drug store saloon." But this is one of the difficulties peculiarly attendant on prohibition. Other provisions, common in licensing laws, such as clauses for search and sei/.ure, penalties on officers who neglect their duty, penalties for adulteration, etc., call for no special remark. A subject still remaining to be noticed is that of "Scientific Temperance Instruction,'" which, in one form or another, has in the course of the last ten years been made comjjulsory in the public schools of a large number of States. Vermont was the first State to adopt such a law, and by 1890 more than thirty States had given statutory recognition to this branch of teaching, the introduction of which as a compulsory subject of * Page 380. Sec also Atlanta onlinance, ss. 898 — 9, j). 419. See also laws of Michigan, Nebraska, etc. So.uj-: Details. 97 ISCS ;cial iiitic has ry in \vas than .h of ct of V also instruction in the schools has been pressed by its advocates on the State Legislatures with very great vigour and much success.'^ The terms of these laws vary in different States. Commonly, the study of " physiology and hygiene, with special reference to the effects of alcoholic drinks, stimulants, and narcotics upon the human system " is required of all pupils in all public schools. In many, if not the majority, of the States it must be pursued with text-books in the hands of pupils able to read ; in some, the text-books used in primary and intermediate schools must give one-fourth of their space to tem[)erance matter, and those used in high schools not less than twenty ])ages. Generally, also, no teacher who has not })assed a satisfactory examinal mi in this subject can be granted a certificate or be authorised to teach. The enactment of the law was followed by a vigorous war on the subject of the text-books. The advocates of the views just mentioned insisted that prominence should be given to an uncompromising exposition of the necessity of complete abstinence, in order to " so popularise the science of tem- perance that the smallest pupils may understand from their school manuals why they should neither drink alcoholic li(iuors of any kind, nor use tobacco." The adoption by some States of the requirement that the books must devote one-fourth of their si)ace to the effects of alcohol and the other narcotics marked a victory for this side in the dispute. The promoters of the movement frankly stated their object in a petition addressed to publishers of "temperance text- books," in the course of which the following passage occurs : — " This is not a physiological but a temi)erance movement. In all grades below the high school this instruction should contain only physiology enough to make the hygiene of temperance * A liistory of the inDvemeut, from the point of view of those who have pushetl it on, has been published in the form of a pamphlet by Mrs. Mary 11. Hunt, the superintendent of that department of the Women's Christian Temperance Union which undertakes this particular work. H American ]j':>uor Laws. \ r and other laws of health intelligible. Temperance should be the chief, and not the subordinate, topic, and should occupy at least one-fourth of the space in text-books for these grades." The gist of the objection to the older books was that they were directed against "the abuse and not the use of alcohol." "The object of all this legislation "(as stated in the preface to one of the recognised text-books) " is not that the luture citizen may know the technical names of bones, nerves, and muscles, but that he may have a timely and forcwarnifii:^ knowledge of the effects of alcohol and other popular poisons upon the human body, and therefore upon life and character." A great variety of elementary text-books have bejn issued within the last few years, the chief object of which is to teach that all drinks containing alcohol in large or small (juantities are poisons, and have a peculiar property of leading the consumer on from a moderate to an excessive indulgence. It is also declared to be " the nature of alcohol to make a person not care if he does wrong." The functions and organs of the human body are successively described, and the ruinous effects of alcohol on each organ are graphically set forth. The positive evil, as well as the probable risk, of even the smallest use of alcoholic liquor is particularly emphasised*; and the superiority of the total abstainer in all the physical and mental operations of life is repeatedly inculcated. The thick speech, bloated ai)pearance, and rolling gait, and * " Whenever a man takes a glass of beer or other liquor that has alcohol in it, the blood carries the alcohol to his brain. If this alcohol were like water it would not harm the brain, for the brain needs water. But alcohol is a sharp, biting poison. It will shrink the brain and do it much other harm ... A man poisons his brain a little, if he takes only the alcohol there is in a little beer or cider." *' Cider, beer, wine, or any liquor that contains alcohol, deadens the nerves that give us the sense of taste. One who drinks any of these, or uses tobacco, soon becomes unable to taste delicate flavours." ** While this appetite is not formed as readily in some persons as in others, no one can be sure how soon alcohol will become his master if he takes it in any form." '! SoM/-: Detail s. 99 alternatives to total abstinence, l^ use o^ ' ' ^ cooking is strongly condeu,ned. °"'-' '"'"°'' '" 'lie contention of the \VC TIT ti,.,t r S|«ce in the text hn,a- i " , •'•^— "i'^' one fourth of the to tempe ance ,mt " ''""" '"^ 'T''^' "^y ''^-'^ '- devoted carried on l,v ,h > f ^^-'^^^'liere a vigorous contest was e.nbod> ° thei v,e ; T: 'f'"^ '"' "" '^''"'^"°" "'■ '"-^^ In one srate , ' ' ""'^ ^"'^'''^ ""' ■'''"'-y^ sttecessful. H 2 lOO CMAPrEK VII. MAINE. (I'rohibition.) The Maine Liquor Law was enacted in 1851, Tlie pr()[)()sal had been unsucessfiilly brout^ht forward in the previous year ; l)ul in 1851 the Bill was rapidly passed through all its stages without amendment, and almost without discussion. In ] S56 the law was repealed, but, two years later, was re-enacted, and continues in force at the present time, amended by various enactments increasing, for the most ])art, the stringency of its provisions. In 1884, a proposal to make it a part of the Constitution of the State was submitted to popular vole, and was carried by a large majority. The following is a brief summary of the law as it now exists : — The following things are prohibited : — {a) Selling intoxicating liquor (except as especially provided) — punishment, $50 n/n/ 30 days' imprisonment ; and, on subsequent convictions, $200 a/ni 6 months' imprisonment. {//) Being a common seller- $100 and 30 days' ; ($200 and 4 months' on subsequent convictioi . (c) Keeping a drinking-house and lippling-shop— $100 tr//(i 60 days'. {(I) Depositing or having in possession liquor with intent to sell in \iolation of law, or with intent that any other person shall sell, or to aid any person in such sale— $100 and 60 days'. (c) Travelling from place to ])lace, carrj ing or offering for sale, or obtaining or offering to obtain, orders for the sale or delivery of liquor — $20 to $500, and, in default of payment, two to six months' imprisonment. (/) Knowingly bringing into the State, or transporting fiom place to place in the State, liquor with intent as abo\c — $500 and one year's imprisonment.* * See note f, next page. M.-HXE. lOT torn it lid ;i {g) Manufacturing for s ilc any intoxicating^ liquor except cider — $i,ooo and 2 months'. All places used for the sale or keeping o^ intoxicating li([Uors, or where intoxicating liquors are sold for tijipling purposes, and all places of resort where intoxicating liquors are kept, sold, given away, drunk, or dispensed in any manner not provided by law, are declared to be common nuisances, and the penalty is a line not exceeding $i,ooo or a year's imprisonment. It will he seen that the penalties in the above cases vary considerably in severity, but that the law generally retjuires both fine and also imprisonment.* The object of the prohibi- tionists has been to increase the penalties all round. vVs regards illegal transportation (see / above), they have, by a recent amendment of the law, succeeded in their object; but it is desired to extend this heavy punishment toother offences.f In some cases prosecution must be by indictment, others may be dealt with by courts of summary jurisdiction ; but the defendant can always a[)peal to a jury. Wherever the law prescribes both fine and imprisonment, the latter is doubled if the former is not i)aid. The punish- ment for a single act of transportation, therefore, may be two years' im[)risonment, irrespective of the aniount of lic[Uor transported i * By a law of 1893, however, the courts are allowed more discretion in this respect. f Since tlie above was written, the law lixin;^ the penalty for illei^al transportation lias been altered by the Legislature in the Session of 1893 ; a penalty not less ihan $50 nor more than $100, and 60 days' iinprisonnient (in case of a railway, steamboat, or express company, a fine not exceeding $200) being substituted for the very heavy punishment mentioned in the text. I I was told that certain cases of this offence were pending Ijcfore tlie Supreme Court of the State on ajipeal, and that it was thought possible the court might decline to enforce the punishment, as being" unreasonably severe. It is difficult, however, to see how the express language of tlie statute can legally be evaded. — But, as staled in the preceding note, this l)unishment has in the present year been mitigated by Act of the Legislature. lO. American Liquor Lahs. Payment by any person of the United States tax as a liquor- seller is prima facie evidence that he is a common seller. Provision is made for enabling the officers of the law, under a'llhority of a magistrate's warrant granted on sworn in- formation, to search for and seize liquor and arrest the person keeping it. Any person found intoxicated in any street, highway, or public place (or in his own house or elsewhere, if he is quarrelsome) is liable to a fine not exceeding $ro or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days. Anyone injured in person, property, means of support, or other- wise by an intoxicated person, has a right of action against anyone who caused or contributed to his intoxicatiem. Until recently, sales of lic(uor in the original packages in which it was imported were allowed ; but a recent statute has brought such sales under the general prohibitory law. In order that liquor maybe provided for medicinal, mechanical, and manufacturing purposes, the local authority of each city and town may annually appoint an agent to sell it for those purposes only. These agents obtain their supply from a commisioner appointed by the Governor of the State in Council. ■"JMiere are two, and may be three, sets of ofificers charged with the duty of enforcing these laws ; vi/. : — Firstly : The marshal and the ordinary police of each city and town. Secondly: The county sheriff and his officers, whose duty is not only to enforce the judgments and decisions of the courts and carry out legal process, but also to see that the laws are obeyed and to cause proceedings to be taken against offenders. This duty is theirs as regards the enforcement of the laws in general, but is particularly enjoined upon them with regard to those relating to the sale of liquor and the suppression of disorderly houses. Thirdly : On petition of thirty taxpayers in any county, repre- senting that the licjuor laws are not faithfully enforced by the county or local officers, the Governor of the State is required, if the representations appear to be well-founded, to appoint special officers to enforce these laws. In practice, however, the mode in which the law is enforced Maixi:. 103 depends in general chiefly on the action of the county sheriff and his deputies. The chief city of Maine is Portland, in Cumberland County, a considerable seaport, having a jjopulation of 36,400. The prohibitory law, to which it has been subject for forty years, has been enforced during that period with varying severity;* but during the last two yeau-, since the beginning of 1891, it has been enforced with exceptional vigour ; f indeed, it is said that j^robably at no other time and in no other part of the State have such determined efforts been made to put an end to the liquor traffic. Frequent domiciliary visits are i)aid by the sherift'and deputies to suspected places, and large (juantitics of li(iuor have been seized and destroyed. It would seem that there is no city in the United States better situated than Portland to throw light on the fjuestion of how much success may be looked for from prohibition in an imjiortant centre of population, which has had a long experience of such a law, and has formed such habits of mind and action in regard to abstention from li([uor as result from that experience.! As regards the general habits of the people, it is impossible to form anything approaching a precise estimate cf the jmc- portion which teetotallers bear to the whole population ; nc r is any information obtainable showing the amount of licjuor * In the early days of the law, the contest between the "ramrods" (prohibitionists) and the " rummies " was carried on with a good deal (if vigour. During 1856-7, the State relapsed into a licence law ; but then reverted to prohibition. During the recession troul)les tlie question fell into abeyance. t In Portland the city government is Democratic, and is said not to favour the new rt'giine. The sheriff appoirts liis own deputies to carry out his orders ; he has no control of the municipal police. X It is sometimes said — and the suggestion is, perhaps, not groundless — that prohibition has had a specially favourable field in Maine, which lies somewhat out of the general track of affairs, and has been subject to fewer disturbing influences and circumstances than many other States. On the other hand, Portland itself is a foreign- trade seaport, though not one of first-rate importance. I04 Amkricax Liquor Laws. l)rought into the State, cither legally, for home consumption, or illeL,'aliy for sale. There is, however, no doubt that a large j)roportion of the peo])le are total abstainers ; and, while it is l)robal)le that this fact is due, in a great measure, to religious and moral influences independent of the i)rohii)itory law, it is generally admitted by its oj)ponents that prohibition -by tending to drive the traffic into bye-ways and disreputable "dives," by removing the visible temptations offered by open bars and saloons, by making it relatively, if not absolutely, difficult to obtain drink, and by throwing a general atmosphere of subterfuge and disre[)ute about the trade has been a material agent in supi)ressing a demand which is not only regarded by many as morally wrong and physically ruinous, but is rendered by the operation of the law disreputable. 'J'hese tendencies, receiving support from the general v ce and sentiment of the women, have so influenced manners that, whatever share in the result ought to be assigned to the effect of prohibition, it is a fact that the demand for li'juor or the desire for it, in large quantities or small, proceeds only from a limited section of the population. Even taking the wealthier class alone — whom the prohibitory clauses of the law would not much affect, since the introduction of li(iu()r into the State for private use is not interfered with — it is probably safe to estimate that in the residences of at least one-half of them no alcoholic licpiors are in use, The law of Maine also recjuires temperance teaching to be administered daily to all the pupils in all [)ublic schools in the State.* Allowances have to be made for these circum- stances in forecasting the effects of applying a prohibitory law 1 * The text-book used in the schools of Portland is Dr. Thayer Smith's " Primer of Pliysioloi^y and Hygiene,'' which describes, chapter by chapter, the struclure and functions of the different parts of the human anatomy, and tlic evil effects produced on them l)y alcohcjl and tobacco. A supple- mentary chapter on stimulants and narcotics is added, in which the mischief caused by smoking and drinking (moderate as well as excessive) are set forth. About five minutes a day are given to this study. Af.i/x/'U 105 to other places, where the general habits ot the people are different. The good order of the town appears to be preserved easily enough by a force of no more than from thirty-fiw lo forty constables -about one to every thousaml (jf the jjopulation. Drunkenness has, however, by no means been stamped out; and those who are best able lo judge do not think that, with the utmost vigilance, it is i)ossible entirely to suppress the illicit supply of licjuor. The " Rum Room " in the basement of the City Hall— the receptacle for the licpior seized by the authorities — bears evidence confirmatory of this o[)inion ; the lifpior here received is periodically destroyed,* but a new supply soon comes in -though, after two years during which the law has been stricdy enforced, the accumulations are less voluminous than they were at the commencement of that period. Except at the City Agency (to be mentioned later) and in some of the hotels, where wine and beer can still be obtained by guests in their rooms and even in the public dining-room, a stranger in Portland would probably have difficulty in purchasing litpior. In the lower parts of the city there are h uints where drink is secretly consumed on the premises by those who freifiuor Agency. The number of persons in Maine who \)[\\(\ the retail li(iu()r-dea1ers' tax for the year ending June 30, 1892, was erc twenty-one arrests lust week, of which ten were fur drunkenness."— tA/c/'t'A' 17. " The patrol wagon went on an expedition after drunks on Kennebec Sin/et yesterday afternoon. 'I'hree men were <^athered ti\i;elher from one place or another, and all taken to the station at once." -~( VA'/'^:;- iS. " Mi'Nlcil'Al. ("oiMM'. — l'efore Iudt;e (iould. U\(fiicsJa}'.- 'V\\^ \w\'^ (lil)bons, janies McOlynn, Patrick l"'laherly, and Eugene K. Cunningham. Intoxicatioii. Mach lined $3 and costs. "James A. F.acey. Common nuisance. ISound over to the i;rand jury in the sum of $500. " Patrick ). Cady, I'/lward J. Cady, and James K. Cady. Search and .sci/aire. Mdward discharijed. James K. and Patrick each lined $100 and onedialf Costs and 60 days in the ci unty jail. llolli ap|)ealed. "Edward J. Cady and Patrick J. (,!ady. Search and seizure. I)is- chart^cd." — October 19. " N'esterday morning Mary .Sullivan was brout;ht before the .Municipal Court by the sheriffs. She was chart^ed with beini:; a common drunkard, and was sentenced to 30 days in the House of Correction. This was the only business." —tV/^/'<:r 20. " Skizukks I uis MoKNlNC. — The sheriffs made a seizure of hard stuff this forenoon at the place on York Street kept by John and Ellen Ibjwley. 'I'hey also got a (piantity at Mary Welch's, 51, Centre Street." — Lktobcr 20. Maine. 109 "hard li(|iior " (spirils), and some of it is of tlic vilest (lualiLy."" A comparison of police-eourt .statistics is not altogether to l)e relied on, since a high return of arrests may be tlie result of a strict enforcement of the law as well as of an excess of law- breaking. No return is published of the cases of drunkenness dealt with summarily in the municipal court of Portland. The following figures are, however, received from the best authority : — • ^"'V "!■• I'OkTLANI), maim:. -AKkKSTS. \ uai- t-MKiinij 1N72 IS74 1-S75 1876 1S77 IS7,S i 1,221 890 606 5«9 558 636 534 421 379 605 534 454 279 205 191 "•5 279 249 215 322 557 601 <\S5 788 790 864 603 682 820 660 603 55 f TomI. i,7(Ji 1,022 922 2, \OQ 2,328 i.8f)4 i,0o8 i..^S5 ''54,5 '.447 1,207 1,244 i>34f> 1,426 1,024 1,061 ',425 1,194 1,057 830 C DIllllKlll I)niiikaicl,s. All Ciiiiu 9 2,538 5 2,441 3 1,374 i 3.087 3« 3, '43 22 2,716 30 2,421 56 1 2,440 60 2,433 22 1 2,213 12 ^ 2,065 II 2,336 5 2,219 27 2,250 57 2,281 64 2,038 81 2,098 '3^' 2,363 174 2, Kii) '54 1,922 «7 i,5uu There seems, however, to be little direet evidence of the adulteration of iquor with iniuriou.s n.atter. The reports of anaiy.sts that I have met with .show that water is the eliief ingredient of achdteralion, thou.t;!, c<.iouMng and flavouring matters are also used, which, however, do n.,t appear to be particularly hurtful. New spirit is, of course, very poisonous, and the violently evil effects sometimes produced appear lu be ..hen attributable to this cau.se rather than to the introduction of poisonous adulterants. 1 he l,clief, however, is prevalent tliat much injurious adultera- tion of spirits is practised. I lO American Liquor Laivs. These figures appear to show that the energy of the present sheriff in putting down drink-shops has borne fruit in a con- sideral)le faUing off of drunkenness. Those arrested for drunkenness only are simply held in custody, and when sober discharged ; those for drunkenness and disturbance are sup- posed to be put before the court and sentenced. It has been alleged that for political reasons many offenders have been simply discharged after a night in the police station, without any [)roceeding being taken against them or any record being kept of their arrest. I cannot tell to what extent this charge may be true, but I have been told on what ai)peared to be good authority that it was not altogether without foundation. Many intoxicated persons, of course, come upon the streets who are not arrested.* The following is a return of the number of prosecutions on indictment for violation of the li(|Uor law in five of the most populous counties, and also in the whole State, in several years : — Year 'Cmnberland, Andr... ^ , ^ or.clm« Pop (,890) scogg.n, g^^^^/ ; Pop. 7 INov, I. yijOoo. ; lop. 49,003. ' I lobscot, Kennebec, ^yj^^,^ ^,_^^^_ 72 000. I'op. 57,oo3. 1881 174 66 III 37 135 646 1883 155 40 116 5C 57 628 1884 156 133 63 loi 229 818 I8S5 198 44 62 no 142 798 1889 154(242) 95(129) 47 (>S4) 85(145) 244(289) 786(1,231) 1890 66(167) 81(116) 13 (5S) 91 (129) 179(232) 649(1,122) 1 89 1 202 (286) 84(101) 67(92) 49(96) 154(199) 810(1,203) The figures in brackets against the years 1889-91 show the total number of indictments for offences of all kinds. It will be seen that these licjuor cases form generally a majority, and often a very large majority, of the whole number. The published returns of indictable offences show a small number of prosecutions for drunkenness, but such cases are - * For a comparison of arrests in Portland and other cities, see p. 73. Maine. 1 1 1 generally dealt with summarily in the lower courts, for whicli no returns are published. According to the official prison report, in the year ending November 30th, 1892, 1,714 persons were committed to the county jails for drunkenness, and 348 for selling licjuor. One of the points in which the advocates of prohibition find the law defective is the opi)ortunity which the forms of procedure offer for delay in the final adjudication. Some of the offences under the licjuor laws can be tried only on indici- msnt, others are triable by the municipal courts, but in these cases the defendant may always appeal to a jury. When the indictment is presented* the defendant's attorney may, and generally will (unless he has a good case for an accpiittal), demur on some technical ground to the indictment, whereupon the trial has to be postponed ; or, instead of taking that course, he may, after a verdict, move to stay sentence ; in either case the defendant may not be finally sentenced till a full year or more has elapsed since he committed his offence, t It is true that the Attorney-Oeneral has a right to apply in a summary way to the Supreme Court to dispose of a demurrer if it is frivolous ; but this power seems to be rarely exercised. The statistics published with the annual report of the State's Attorney-deneral appear to show that nearly every one of these liquor cases is taken to the Supreme Court, where the exceptions are almost invariably overruled. Attempts are * Indictal)le offences are tried in Cumberland and in two other counties before what is known as the " Superior Court " — a court especially appropriated to the county, and having full crhiiinal and limited civil juiisdiction. In cou.jties which have no Superior Court, the cases are tried before a judge of the Supreme (State) Court on circuit. Sessions of the Superior Courts are held in January, May, and September. t For example, a man is brought up in Septeml)cr before the municipal court ; he appeals to a jury ; the matter goes before the grand jury in January and comes on for trial. Exceptions are taken to the indictment ; the case stands over till July, when the Supreme Court sits to deal with these cases. The exceptions are overruled and the case is finally disposed of at the vSeptember session of the Superior Court, 112 Amkk/cax Liquor Zaiis. being made to amend the law by requiring a defendant wlio adopts tiiese dilatory tactics to find sureties in substantial amounts for his appearance. It is said that there is no difficulty in getting juries to convi. t in li([uor cases. Indeed, I was told that when a Portia' d liiiuor-seller comes up before a Cumberland county jury composed largely of fLirmers, there is more danger of some prejudice being manifested against him than any undue feeling in his favour. Bangor ({)oi)ulation nearly 20,000), the third largest town in the State, is a contrast to Portland. Pars are open in the hotels, in eating-houses, and grocers' shops, and li(iuor is freely sold by apothecaries. The bar is set behind a curtain or partition running across a ])ortion of the back part of the shop ; but no particular trouble is taken. to make the screen effective to prevent the liquor being seen from the street, and, wherever the screen ai)pears, it is as sure a sign of what is within as a Red Pion swinging over the door. The customer walks in and is served without any concealment. Beer is very commonly called for, but every kind of drink is to be had. It is said, however, that not much drunkenness is seen in Bangor, except during a short time in the spring, when there is an intlux of lumbermen (many of them French-Canadians), who come down at that })eriod from the backwoods, where they have been living a hard life without access to li([uor. A portion of tlic drunkenness which exists is ascribed to the villainous stuff sold under the present conditions of the trade. 'Phc number of licjuor shops has been estimated as high as 300 or more ; whether or not this is an exaggeration, the number is certainly very large. ''^ In one part of the town they are crowded together, and they occur at freiiuent intervals in other parts, from the superior restaurant to the low "dive." Apothecaries serve out drink in the back part of their shops, where they compound their medicines. * Si'C note on p. 1 14. •n in there |ians), ivhere A the irade. :;h as the they lis in live." lops, Ma iNE. 113 A few years ago an attempt was made by the vStatc to enforce the law in Bangor by means of the provision authoris- ing the Governor to appoint special officers, I had some conversation with an officer (now a private detective) who was appointed for this ])urpose. He told me that he was a strict abstainer and favoinal)le in princi[)le to prohibition. In the state of opinion in Bangor, however, he found it utterly impossible to enforce the law. Both the citizens and the municipal author- ities were oi)po3ed to him ; he could obtain no sui)port, and his position soon became so odious that he abandoned his task, and things in Bangor went back to their usual condition. One of the prominent prohibitionists of the place, while he did not appear to realise the full extent to which the law is openly evaded, admitted to me that local public opinion did not support a strict administration, and he even said that he thought a high- licence law combined with local oi)tion preferable in practice to i)rohibition, in cases where public sentiment allows the prohibitory law to be flagrantly violated.* The opinion in favour of high-licence and local option seems to be general in Bangor. A restaurant keeper told me that he would willingly pay 1,000 or even 1,500 dollars a year in duty, if there were properly enforced licence laws. At present it seems that the liciuor-sellers have generally to pay what is virtually a licence duty varying from no to 60 dollars. It is levied as a fine. The United States litjuor tax is strictly collected, and the county officials occasionally inspect the collector's books, and bring up before the courts those who have paid the tax, who are thereupon fined for violation of the State law. They never know when the law will come dowi. * This gentleman's first remark to me, when I had explained that the object of my visit was to obtain information, in view of the possibility of a stringent lii|iiur law being proposed in Great Britain, was, "Keep it away from politics." Politics, however, seem to have a double effect in Maine weakening the opposition to the law itself, as well as weakening the enforcement of the law. ri4 AnrERiCAX Liquor Laws. upon them, hut experience leads them to expect a prosecution about once a year."**" In other parts of the State the law is enforced, so far as the towns are concerned, with varying vigour and success. In Androscoggin county the traffic is driven into secret places, and I was told that the new sheriff recently elected for this county was likely to act with vigour. The chief city, Lewiston (population, 21,000), is said to contain as many as fifteen active " beer clubs," with an average membership) of fifty. All such clubs are illegal, since every " place of resort," where intoxicating liquors are kept or drunk in any manner not provided for by law, is declared to be a common nuisance. t In some other counties greater laxity prevails ; as for example, in Augusta and Gardiner in Kennebec county, and in Belfast in Waldo county, etc. Nowhere, however, is the law ([uite so flagrantly and openly violated as in I^angor, unless there may be some other places in the same county (Penobscot) where a similar state of things exists. | Some of the towns contain a considerable number of 11 * The law imposes imprisonment as well as fine for most lifjuor offences. In these cases in liangor no imprisonment is inflicted. The offence charged may, perhaps, be that of keeping a common nuisance, which does not necessarily involve imprisonment. In the Breivers' Joiij-nal, March, 1893, I read that one of these raids had just taken place, when 297 li([uor-sellers were indicted in one day. I At clubs in Maine the members have private lockers, in which each can keep his own supply of wine, etc. X A correspondent in Portland (one likely to be well informed, but no friend of prohibition) wrote to me, in April, 1893 : — " In Cumberland county the law is enforced exactly as it was when you were here. We have our regular crop of drunken labouring men on Sundays. The licjuor is of the kind you saw in the ' Rum Room ' under City Hall. In other counties in the State, I am informed that the enforcement is even less rigid than it has been for some time i)ast. In all the coast counties, exce: i Cumberland county, practically, liquor is sold as freely as in Bangor. At the Augusta House this winter, during the session of Legislature, the bar was as open as a like bar would be in Chicago." {See Note at the end of this chapter—" A Liquor Raid in Maine.") Maine. US of each |)ut no lerlancl We ii other U rigkl lexce' '- jr. At Ihe bar 1 end of French, who seem less generally than the English-speaking population to have adopted the habit of total abstinence. A feature peculiar to Maine is the succession of places, all along the coast-line, which are frequented as holiday resorts during the summer months by visitors from New P^ngland and more distant ])arts of the United States, nnd from Canada. At some of these j)laces certainly, and, according to my information, at the great majority of them, the prohibitory law is practically inoperative, so far as the summer visitors arc concerned,* and it is evident that the profits of hotel-keeping in the short season during which such places are frequented might be seriously affected by the diminution, both in the number of visitors and in the sources of profit, which would be likely to result from a strict enforcement of the law. The popularity of these summer resorts is regarded as an important element in the general prosperity of the State. Turning from the towns to the country districts which contain the great bulk of the population,! there seems to be no doubt that here prohibition is very generally effective. It is admitted on all sides that the consumption of liquor outside the towns is extremely small, except, indeed, in some parts in the north and east near the Canadian frontier, where many French are found, and where liquor is easily brought across the border. With this exception, the law seems to be easily enforced, the consumption being small and the demand small. The custom, once general, of supplying workmen with * At Bar Harbour, at least, drink-shops (apart from the hotels) are not unknown. I was told that it had been the practice at one of these watering- places for the authorities to " discover" at the end of the season tliat the law had l)een evaded, and to confiscate to their own use the remainder of the stock, which was carefully regulated so as to be neither too large nor too small. t The population of Maine is about 600, oco, ov •which only about 185,000, or two-sevenths of the whole, live in nineteen towns having a population exceeding 3,500. The State contains an average of twenty-two inhaliitants to the square mile. I 2 ii6 American Liquor Laws. spirit rations at harvest time and on other occasions is now unknown ; and in much of the agricultural portion of the State, comi)rising a large portion of the whole area and population, the demand for drink seems almost to have dis- appeared, and the supply to be rarely met with. There is said, however, to be, to a limited extent, a consumption of cider and a sale of cider for drink. The exception in the prohibitory law in favour of cider is made in the interest of the farmers, who in other respects are the most uncomjjromising advocates of prohibition. Apples are one of the leading crops in some of the best agricultural districts in the State ; the selected fruit being exported, and a portion of the remainder pressed into cider. The law does not permit its sale "as a beverage or for tippling purposes;"* the vendor, however, is not bound to be inquisitorial, nor does he usually ask questions. No very acdve steps seem generally to be taken for checking the illicit sale of cider, but it does not appear to be thought that the law is violated to any serious extent. In attempting to ascertain the working of the Maine Liquor Law, one point which it is necessary to take into account is its relation to politics. The law itself is a matter of State politics; its enforcement is a matter of local politics. The prohibition party, though comparatively small, is extremely active, and wields an influence disproportionate to its numerical strength, inasmuch as the great political parties are equally enough divided to render the support of the prohibitionists a matter of great importance to the maintenance of the existing Republican majority. Thus the prohibition movement has received much support from motives of political expediency, but I was assured that a large number of Republicans are in their own mind strongly opposed to it.f The party managers, however, tell * Cider is used for making vinegar and for cooking purposes, f The belief was confidently expressed to me that among voters of the more intelligent and socially higher class as many as 90 per cent. f AfA INR. 117 them that in the interest of the i)arty they must vote for it, and they vote accordingly. Prohibition is favoured by some wlio are not total ai)stainers, but wlio are inlluenced by a sense of tlie social evils resulting from the retail li([Uor trade. The farmers, however, are the backbone of the movement. Through its alliance with the Re[)ul)licans the prohibition [)arty has been enabled not merely to maintain the law, but to make it part of the Constitution of the State, and to secure the passing of a series of amendments of increasing severity to the original statute. Tlie vState Legislature, however, which makes the law, is not concerned in enforcing it ; and it has been commonly said that many people are in favour of the law and against its enforcement. As already explained, the county sheriff is the officer on whom this duty devolves, and accordingly the election of the sheriff, once every two years, is an occasion which calls up the local forces favourable to a more or to a less strict administration in each county. It is well understood by the electors that this is the issue when they are called upon to vote for this or that candidate for the office ; and, therefore, a sheriff who exercises to the full his powers for the suppression of the drink traffic is not likely to be found in a county where the prohibition party is not both numerous and energetic. The Republican party, having supported the law to please the prohibitionists, is often inclined to conciliate the liquor-dealers by not pressing them too hard. Another obstacle to a strict administration of the law is found in the great temptations to corruption to which the officers are exposed. From these considerations it will aj)pear that the question of the success or failure of the Maine Liquor Law is not to be judged solely by reference to the fact of its long existence and increased severity, and to the degree to which experience disapproved of prohibition, although certainly one-half, ant! probably not less than two-thirds, of them used no alcoholic liquors in their own houses. ii8 Amer/cax L/Qi'ON Laws. sliovvs it can be enforced where the officials are zealous, honest, and capable ; but account must also be taken of the operation local [)ubli(; sentiment (particularly as evinced at the election of sherifts), which in extreme cases has resulted, as at Bangor, almost in the establishment of a free trade system by local option, in defiance of the State law. The consideration of this (juestion suggests the further (speculative) question : " If prohibition were vigorously enforced by an ade(|uate staff of officers, irresi)ectivc of local sentiment, how would the majority in the State Legislature in favour of the retention of the law be affected?" To this, no positive answer can be returned; oi^inions certainly would widely differ ; one official of much experience declared to me that, in his judgment, prohibition would bear tiie strain of strict enforcement : undoubtedly many would look for the opposite result. An illustration of this side of the quesdon may be taken from the last election of the sheriff for Cumberland county, which includes the city of Portland. The ordinary practice is that the sheriff, at the close of his first term of office, is re-elected for a second te^m, after which he retires. The present sheriff, who has brought about the rigid enforcement of the law during the past two years, was, in the autumn of 1892, put up again as the official candidate of his party, according to custom. He carried his election, but carried it only by a narrow majority — the normal majority of his party being at the time, as shown in the election of other officers, much greater. This fact proves that, after a fair allowance made for cross-voting (some Democrats being ardent prohibitionists),* a considerable body of Repub- licans found their hostility to an uncompromising enforcement * I was told also that a number of anti-prohibitionists voted at this election for the present sheriff, on the ground that as long as the law existed it ought to be enforced ; that the proper object of attack was the law itself and not its administration ; and in the belief that a vigorous administration w )uld result in strengthening the movement for repeal. Maine, 119 of i)roliil)ition stronger than their i);irly iillogiaiicc. The o[>iiiion was confidently expressed to nie that the party organisation would not a second time stand such a strain, and that the Republican managers will, on the next occasion, be careful not to selec't a candidate likely to rouse hostihty in the [)arty by his known determination to give full effect to the law. On the other hand, I have heard the opposite o[)inion held, that the re-election of this sheriff, even by a narrow vote, in the face of the personal enmities which his administration had aroused, and the strong anti-prohibition spirit prevalent in Portland (stronger, probably, than in any other county, exce[)t one, in the State), is evidence of the possibility of making [)rohibition permanently effective. Time alone can decide between these views ; much will depend on the future increase or decrease in numbers and influence of the active section of the prohibitionists. The past strength in Maine of this active section -which, n fact, comprises the whole prohibition party, properly so-called, viz. those who at popular elections vote for a i)rohibition candidate in preference to a Republican or a Democrat — is shown in the following figures, giving the votes cast for the prohibition candidate at the last three presidential elections : — 1SS4 1SS8 1892 2,160 out of 130,460 votes cast for all candidates. 2,690 ,, 128,250 3,060 ,, 116,420 The prohibition vote in Maine is smaller than in some other States ; but this, doubtless, is due to the fact that Maine already has legislative prohibition, and the supporters of that system are therefore free, so far as their own State politics are concerned, to vote as Republicans or Democrats. State prohibition does not meet all the aspirations of prohibitionists, but, naturally, takes off much of the keenness of prohibitionist agitation in States which have adopted it. I20 Ami'.rh '. / .V Liquor La n s. 'i'lic most conflicting statcnieiUs have l)ccn made regardinL; the f;encral (lueslions of crime, insanity, and pauperism in Maine. 'I'he opi)onents of i)rohibiti()n draw attention to the great increase of crime since 1850, statistics sliowing it to have increascii in a much higher ratio than the p()[)nlation. On the opposite side, it is claimed tluit prohibition has done much to clieck crime, and that if tlie law were rei)ealed crime would increase. No attempt will he made here to draw inferences — which must he largely speculative — from such facts as can he established on one side or the other. 1 am content to give a few figures taken from official sources, and to leave it to others to form their own conclusions on this subject. NUMllER Ol' I'RISONKRS IN SI A IF, I'FA' nKNI'IARV AND COUMV lAH.S. State penitentiary County jails J\iiie I, 1880. 1 85 1890. 170 302 i November 30, 1892, 135 400 J7^ f/z The figures for i8So and 1890 are from the United States census, those for 1892 from the Reports of State officials. The chaplain of the State Penitentiary,* in his Rejiort for the last- mentioned year, states that 46 per cent, of the prisoners were, according to their own statements, teetotallers. It will be observed that the penitentiary return shows a steady diminution of prisoners, and the jail returns a steady increase. Taking the two classes together, the following figures show — (i) the ratio of prisoners per million inhabitants in Maine, and (2) the average ratio for all the nine States included in the * In Maine it is not called the Penitentiary, but the vState Prison. The term " penitentiary " is here used as being the usual name in the United States for the institution corresponding to our ''onvict prisons, to which the more serious cases are sent. ^f.\ I XI-:, 121 Norlli Atlantic division in the census (Maine, New Hampshire, ^'ellno^t, Massachusetts, Rliode Island, Connecticut, New York, i:nv Jersey, Pennsylvania). Ju, 1880. i8yo. \i)Vfml)er ;(>, 109a. Ratio of penitentiary and county l>iis()ners per million of population : (rt) in Maine (/')• on the average of the nine north-eastern States 1,062 7«4 1,221 S32* The census of 1890 showed IVFaine to have a [)enitcnliary population very largely below, and a county jail population slightly above, the average of the nine Slates in proportion to population. The above figures give Maine a comparatively low prison population, though a decidedly increasing one— the increase having been greater from June, 1890, to November, 1892, than during the whole of the previous ten years. It need hardly be said that an increase of convicts does not alwa)s hnply a corresponding increase of crime. Fresh legislation and increased executive efficiency may account for much. JUVICNILE OFFENDERS. Number of juvenile offenders in Re- form School, Maine Ratio of inmates of Reform School per million of population, Maine ... Average ratio for the nine north- eastern States November 30, 1892. 100 * Based on the census population of 1S90. The increase of popula- tion in Maine was less than 2 per cent, frjm 1880 to 1890. I 22 American Liquor L.iiis. Tlic statistics from the Insane Hospital show a i^ieat and progressive inc rease of i)atients : — ■ 1850-1 KS.S5 6 icSOo I 1865 6 1S70 I i-'^ys 6 1880 I 1885 6 1 890- 1 ... 1 89 1 2 ... ... The following statistics of ])auperism are taken from the census returns. Maine shows a very slightly lower ratio than the average of 'ts group : — I)aily ;ivcr.ii;(j niiiiiljcr of iiiniates. ■•• 75 ... 107 ... 248 ... 277 ••• Z(>i ... 398 ... 442 . . . 506 ... 649 ... 685 Number of paupers in almshouses, Maine ... Ratio per million of population, Maine Average ratio for the nine north-eastern States June 1, i38o. ibyo. 1,505 1,161 2,310 1,756 2,339 1,790 In regard to " outdoor " paupers, the census attaches to Maine a number very considerably in excess of the average. Note.— A LK^UOR K.MD IN MAINE. The following extract from the Boslon Herald describes a raid which occurred at Lcwiston several months after my visit to Maine. Whether or not it be accurate in all respects, I give it in extcnso as a somewhat picturesque description of the sort of thing which might very well, and pr()l)ably would, happen on a determined raid being made on the li(|uor- sellers in a place where the law was being violated as flagrantly as it has betii in at least one or two, if not more, of the larger towns in Maine : — "RAMRODS" CAUSE A PANIC. RAIDS IN THE " TEMl'ERANCE TOWN" OK LEWI.STON, ME. Nearly .^10,000 worth of Li(|uors seized from about 40 Saloon-keepers — Dealers unable to hide bottles pass them out to Loafers, who get free "Jags." {Special despatch to the "Boston Herald."] Lewiston, Me., March 28, 1893. —The liquor-sellers of this city were <■♦ I « id Maine. '23 to-day surprised by the most remarkable raid ever made in Maine Nearly .'^lo.ooo worth of into.xicatini^f li(jUors were conliscated. For three months the saloons of Lewiston have been run openly, and liquor has been hauled throui,di the streets as freely as groceries. At seven o'clock this morning there were at least 250 places in this city where liquors might be secured at retail. The policy High Sheriff Hill intended to pursue has been a matter of speculation ever since the county honoured him with the office, January i, 1803. Some said he intended to enforce the liquor law?, while others persisted that he had been supported by the saloon element, and would be lenient. Week after week passed, excitement over the election subside], the Law and Order League and the Women's Christi^.n Temperance Union were " mum," county officials and the police department closed their eyes, and clear was the sailing for the rum crowd. '1 he time came, though, about two weeks ago, when the politicians engaged in the liquor business who claimed to have a " pull " found that the kitchen bar-rooms were cutting inio their business heavily. Competition became so close that it was found necessary to sell good liquors, something unheard of in Lewiston before. Dissatisfaction was manifest, and the wealthier retailers complained openly and loudly against the small fry. The rum smugglers protested. They had been out of work for some time, as the railroads were bringing in liquors unmolested, while a few months ago dozens of smugglers made money smuggling at night-time from country stations. Their prayers were heard, and it brought ai)out one of the most remarkable raids in the history of Lewiston. At seven o'clock this morning Sheritf 1 lill had his dei)uties all gathered in the office at Auburn, together with Llewellyn Maxwell, of Auburn, and Jam.s O'Brien, of Lewiston, who had just been appointed special liejuor officers. The officers numbered fourteen, an!5oo. Notice of the application and of the time and place appointed for hearing it has to be published, and the statements in the application have to be proved. If the permit is granted, the /> A'ajvsas. 127 i api)l.cant has to enter into a bond in .^r,ooo, as security for his compliance with the law. Either the applicant or any citizen ag^a-.eved by the decision of the Probate Judoe may appeal to the district court, which, if the judge appears to have abused his discretion, but not otherwise, miy reverse his order. On a petuion for cancellation on the ground of violation of the law, signed by twenty-five reputable men and twenty-five reputable women residing in the same township, city, or ward, the Probate Judge IS .-equired to summon the permit-holder, and inquire into the case, and if there are reasonable grounds for believino- that he IS not in good faith carrying out all the provisions of the" law the permit is to be cancelled subject to appeal to the district court his provision, however, does not prevent the judge from cancc Vm'r the permit at any time on his own motion. A physician may prescribe liquor to his patient; "btit no such prescription shall be given or liquor administered except in case of actual need, and where in his judgment the use of intoxi- cating liquor is necessary." The penalty for giving a prescription in violation of the law is a fine ranging from Su^o to ^500^^ imprisonment 10 to 90 days.* The sale of liquor by permit-holders is hedged about with imnute restrictions. The purchaser must first make an affidavit in the following form (for which purpose the druggist is authorised to administer an oath) :— ^ " State of Kansas, County of 1, the undersigned, do solemnly swear that my real name is Q^ ; that I reside at county. State ' ^^'^^ of is necessary and actually ntctiea Dy ; to be used as a medicine for the disease . 5 ^•^'^t it is not intended for a beverage, nor to sell nor to give away; that I am over twenty-one years of a-e I therefore make application to aruggist," for said liquor. j && > ^i , Applicant. " Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me this day of ^ ' , Pharmacist. ' * A physician liaving no permit cannot lawfully prescribe linuor as i medicine to a sick patient, and charge and receive pay for it. (Slate v Heming, 32 K 588.) ^ v ^i.uc z/. 128 American Liquor Laws. A corresponding form of affidavit is prescribed on a sale for mechanical or scientific purposes. There may be only one sale and one delivery on any one affidavit ; and the druggist is not under any circumstances to allow liquor to be drunk on his premises. Licence-holders are allowed to sell to one another in quantities not less than a gallon. I'daborate provision is made for the proper authentication of the affidas its, blanks for which are to be supplied by the county clerk in book form. The blanks arc all numbered, and, when filled, are, toj;ether with the drui;gist's afliilavit tliat they represent all the sales made by him, to be filed monthly in the office of the Probate Judge, who is required to make a careful examination of them and see that there has been no irregularity. The druggist has likewise to make a sworn monthly return of his stock of liquor, and of all purchases of liquor made by him during the preceding month, and the names of the persons from whom purchased. Persons making false affidavits are guilty of i)erjury, and punishable with imprison- ment from six months to two years with hard labour, and anyone signing a false name to an affidavit is declared guilty of forgery in the fourth degree. The druggist is further required to keej:) in a book a lull record of every sale, with all particulars ; the record and affidavits to be open at all reasonable hours to public inspection. A similar permit has also to be obtained by anyone desiring to manufacture liquor for medical, scientific, and mechanical ]nirposes. The application in this case must be signed by a majority (in cities ■ of the first or second class by loo) of the resident electors ; and the amount of the bond (which has to be backed by three substantial sureties) is .si 0,000. A manufacturer may sell only in original ])ackages, and only to druggists holding permits, and under elaborate provisions as to affidavits and records. His permit continues in force for five years. The penalty for manufacturing or selling without a permit is a fine of $100 to $500, and imprisonment 30 to 90 d.iys ; and a permit-holder who fails to comply with the requirements of the law in regard to sales of liquor is subject to the same punishment, and is to forfeit his permit and be disqualified for five years from receiving another. The prohibitory law does not, however, apply to the making of wine or cider from grapes or ajjples grown by the person making it, for his own use, or the sale of wine for communion purposes. Kansas. I2Q of it, All civil officers arc required under penalty to give notice to the county attorney of any violation of the law, and furnish him with the names of witnesses. All places where intoxicating liquors are illegally manufactured, sold, bartered, or given away, or are kept for any such purpose, are declared to be common nuisances, and, upon the judgment of a competent court declaring a place to be a nuisance, the sheriff is to shut up and abate it, and the owner or person keeping it is to be fined !i?ioo to .S500, afid imprisoned 30 to 90 days, A perpetual injunction may also be obtained, violation of which is punishable as a contempt. Anyone taking charge of an intoxicated j)crson may recover reasonable compensation, and also five dollars a day from any person who sold the liciuor causing the intoxication. The civil damage clause includes cxemiilary damages, but is directed only against anyone who by selling, etc., caused the intoxication. Notice not to sell may be given. Any person who, directly or indirectly, keeps or maintains by himself, or combining with others (or who assists in keeping or maintaining), "any club-room or other place in which any intoxi- cating liquor is received or kept for the purpose of use, gift, barter, or sale as a beverage, or for distribution among the members of any club or association by any means whatever," and anyone who uses, barters, etc., any liquor so received or kept, is on conviction to be fined .i?ioo to .'?5oo, or imprisoned thirty days to six months. Giving liquor to minors is forbidden. "The giving away of intoxicating liquor, or any shifts or device to evade the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed an unlawful selling within the provisions of this Act." On notice of any violation of the law, the county attorney has power to summon and examine persons whom he believes able to give evidence, and to punish for contempt any who refuse to answer questions (1885). Warrants for search and seizure can be obtained. Probate Judges, county attorneys, county clerks, and other civil officers, are expressly made subject to severe penalties and forfeiture of office for neglect or refusal diligently to perform their duties in enforcing the liquor law. Any common carrier who knowingly carries liquor, to be sold in violation of the law, is punishable with fine and imprisonment. J T30 Amf.ricax Liquor Laws. \ scjiaratc Act, passed in i! Irather my of made upon ■ended on their pledges of allegiance to the cause of prohihilioii. As in Maine and Iowa and other pr(jhibition States, success was gained by the efforts of a zealous and uncompromising minority holding the balance between the two great [)olitical parties, and thus controlling the action of one of them. It is, however, strongly claimed by the Kansas prohibi- tionists that their policy has proved itself a success, that the battle is won, and that prohibition is firmly planted as one of the permanent institutions of their State. Whatever develop- ments may ensue in the future, there seems to be reason for believing that, at the present time at least, the (question has to some extent passed from the phase of acute political contro- versy to that of a general ac(|uiescence in the existence of the law on the part of the majority of the i)ublic at large, if not a settled balance of active popular sentiment in its favour. Such a condition would seem to justify the claim of a more advanced position for the prohibition movement in Kansas than in other States, where certainly it is by no means clear from the struggles and intrigues of party politics.* Two circumstances, related to me by friends of prohibition, may be mentioned as indicating the general attitude of mind on the subject in Kansas. At the time when the celebrated " original package decision " appeared to have struck a serious if not fatal blow at the whole movement for State i)rohibition, by removing the possibility of restricting the sale of liquor in original packages as brought into the State, a strong and general rally was, as I have been assured, manifested in Kansas in favour of taking whatever steps might be necessary for defeating the realisation of this prospect ; so that even men who were not teetotallers, and had never been looked on as prohibitionists, joined those who were acknowledged partisans in declaring their opposition to the return of what they regarded as the nuisance of the saloon. * Quite recently, the State's attorney-general has published some remarks unfavourable to prohibition. ^3- Am/:a'/c.i.v /./(Tf'/v' l.iivs. Again, more recently, the (lucstion of calling together a convention for the purpose of considering certain amendments to the State Constitution was under discussion ; hut many who thought that the Constitution in some respects needed modifica- tion, abandoned tiie project in order that the opjjortunity might not be taken for proposing to reoi)cn the (|uestion of prohibition ; and the convention was not held. A i)rohibitionist lawyer of position, in reply to a letter in which I had put to him certain ([uestions upon the [)()sition of aflairs in this State — amongst others, whether the existence of a strongly favourable local sentiment was not necessary to the (IlIC enforcement of [)rohibition — stated, " It is certainly true that if the peoi)le of Kansas were to be instantly displaced by such as the common people of London or New York, our li(|uor law would immediately become inoperative. Until some such change takes i)lace, 1 doubt very much if the people of the State will ever give the saloon its old position. Politicians do not want it, because they do not relish the return of the li(luor-dealer to his old place as a i)olitical dictator. 'I'he citizens do not want it, because they see noway in which it will benefit the State." He referred also to '' the testimony of a vast majority of the people of the State, who by their votes have declined to repeal the law, or re-submit to the people, or modify it, or in any way banish it from our books. That such change may some time come as a result of a political dis(|uiet, or a general moral disintegration, is no doubt true, but, so far, there seems to be no likelihood whatever of any immediate occurrence of that kind." It is claimed, and probably with reason, that the extension of the municii)al franchise to women has tended to strengthen the position of the prohibitory law. The State of Kansas was admitted into the Union in 1861 its area is 82,000 square miles; and it is essentially an agri- cultural State. Its development after the War was very rapid, I ill I ri- d. KaiXSAS, ^U the population being, in 1860, 107,000; in 1870, nearly 365,000; in 1880, nearly a million; and in 1890, 1,427,000. It was largely colonised from the old Puritan States of New England. It contains no city of first-rate importance, the largest, Kansas City, being credited by the last national census with a population of 38,000 ; and it has only seven towns with populations exceeding 10,000 each.* The average density of the poi)ulation for the whole State is about seventeen to the square mile. It is generally claimed, and I believe is not seriously disputed, that, at all events outside the towns, prohibition is on the whole effective, or at least that, whether from the authority of the law, or the absence of any widespread demand for stimulants, the traffic in liquor is there reduced to very small dimensions. It is about the towns that the dispute as to the efficiency of the law is concentrated ; and so conflicting are the replies given to inquiries on this head addressed to those who, by long residence, have had good opportunities for watching things as they are, that it is not an easy matter for a stranger with limited time for personal observation to see clearly through the mist of heated antagonisms which envelops the matter. One who had travelled much on business in different parts of the State, and who certainly was not ill-disposed to the law, told me, in reply to a (question as to the general efficiency of its enforcement, that he found it to vary much in different towns, according to the greater or less strength and activity of the local sentiment exerted in support of it. This, perhaps, is the safest and truest general answer that can be given to such a (question ; and, indeed, the opinion that the efticient execution of prohibitory enactments is possible only in places where they are actively supported by local sentiment, I found to be the settled conviction of many who in principle were ardent friends * Inchuling Lawrence, with a population, according to the census, of 9,975 in 1890. 134 Am/:awc.lv fj{H'i)R /.Airs. of proliibition. The informant just referred to stated, broadly, that he thought i)roliibition had done good ; that is to say, it liad done good where local public opinion su[)ported it, as it did, in his belief, in the majority of the country towns. Hut where the local opinion was unfavourable, he found the law violated freely, as was the case in some of the small towns as well as the larger ones. \\'here the jmblic sentiment was distinctly prohibitionist, and the officers and police did their duty (as they generally would do in such a place), he found but few "joints/' and believed that it was really difficult for the poor to get drink, though in such places the law was to some extent evaded by clubs formed for this purpose — and by " boot-leggers," " holes- in-the-wall," and other ingenious contrivances. Clubs are of different kinds. 'I'here is the l>oNii fide social club, in which the law no doubt is broken, since the consump- tion of licjuor in a club is of itself illegal, but which has not the evasion of the law as the sole or perhaps the chief object of its existence \ in such a club licjuor is not sold to the members, but each member has a locker with his own supply. Other so called clubs are mere inventions for cheating the law. In exchange for a small payment purporting to be an admission fee, the " member " receives so many checks, each of which is "good" for one drink. The "saw-dust club" is a variety of the same species, the ground being thickly strewn with saw- dust, beneat' ' ich the kegs and bottles are laid out of sight. " F jod " clubs are associations which do not keep a permanent stock of liquor ; but the members from time to time subscribe together and get in a supply from a neighbour- ing vState sufficient for a single carouse. It must always be remembered, in judging of the operation of prohibition in any one of the American States, that the mere consumption of li(iuor is not forbidden, nor is anyone prevented from having liquor brought into the State from outside for his A'l\'.v./.v. i;. own use. TIius, to take an instance, a resident in 'I'opeka or Lawren( c may tele|)hone to Kansas (Jity (Missouri) any morning for a bottle of whisky, and iiave it delivered to liini tlic same day. There is no violation of tiie hiw in this. 'I'hat the kiw of Kansas lias been violated by means of clubs and countless other devices, and is still in a greater or less deijjree violated by such means, is a fact beyond disiiule. \\'hether the extent to which it is so violated betokens a general break-down of the attempt to establish it as a practical measure is another (juestion. Its advocates all admit that it has been, and will continue to be, evaded, but maintain either that it is now, or that it is well on the way towards becoming, as well enforced as most other laws — the larceny laws, for instance ; and they claim that, even when imi)erfectly enforced, it still checks drinking, and prepares the way for good results which it may not at once make manifest. X'oluntary organisations— and chief among them theAVomen's Christian Temperance Union — display much acti\ity in en- deavouring to excite public opinion in ftivour of a strict administration and in the prosecution of oflenders. In illus- tration of this, I may give the following extract from the letter of a corresi)ondent — a lawyer in practice in a small town in the southern part of the State. He is an avowed and aggressive enemy of prohibition, and has written publicly in severe condemnation of what he holds to be its mischievous results. I do not wish unduly to give prominence to his views ; still, so far as fiicts are concerned, he is here speaking of things occurring under his own observation. He writes to me : — " My own court has been occupied for four days trying a druggist for the violation of the prohibitory law, and I am just from the place of trial ; and, aside from the usual sights of a court-room — judge, lawyers, spectators, jurors, and loafers — there are ten ladies of the W.C.T.U., respectable Christian women, watching the pro- ceedings and lending friendlv, but (as they suppose) intUiencing and lobbying, aid to the prosecution. The trial will last another day, 136 American Liouok Lajvs. with the probabilities of a hung jury in the end, which is the result in about two-thirds of the trials." In a sul)scquent letter, I heard from him that llie trial ended as he had anticipated — eleven of the jury for ac(|uittal and one for conviction. In Kansas, as in otlier States, the difficulty of getting juries to convict is foiuid to be a serious obstacle, though it is by no means the only seriotis one, in enforcing a law which is not hacked by i)opular opinion. The following extract from a news[)apcr will serve to illustrate the activit of the anti licjuor i)arty in another way. Osage City is a town of about 3,000 inhabitants : — " Topeka, Kas., March 20//;, 1893. — Ihe Rev. D. C. Milner, president of the State Temperance Union, has been lecturing in Osage County for two weeks. At Osage City, on Saturday, a car-load of liquors was seized and destroyed in the presence of a great crowd of people. The licjuors were hauled out of town to an abandoned coal-shaft, where the bottles and demijohns were broken by the hundreds and the contents poured into the mine. Beer-kegs and whisky-barrels were piled on a bonfire, and thousands of gallons of liquor were burned. Most of the liquor destroyed was the poperty of Kansas City firms, who have opened saloons at Osage City." So far as the majority of the larger towns are concerned, it is certain that much yet remains to be accom[)lished before the law can fairly be said to be efficiently enforced. As already mentioned, Kansas contains seven towns of 10,000 inhabitants and u[)wards. I believe that, as late as the i)resent year, it would not be denied by any fair-minded person accpiainted with the facts, that in five of them licpior was sold hal)itually and openly in defiance of the law. These five towns are : Kansas City, Atchison, Leavenworth, Wichita, and Fort Scott. Of the first two I can speak, to some extent, from personal observation, and of the others from positive testimony given me, not once only, but repeatedly, and by friends as well as opponents of prohibition. Kansas. 137 Tlie position of Kansas City is peculiar. Politically, it is entirely distinct from its much larger namesake, Kansas City, Missouri. Topographically, it forms part of the same place, the boundary between the two States and the two municipalities being an imaginary line running down the middle of a street. Saloons in Kansas City, Kansas, are run ([uite openly, and, indeed, the law both m this and some other respects is (juite a dead-letter. Camhling-houses, for example, which on the other side of the boundary are, to a certain extent, su})presscd and driven into secrecy, are on the Kansas side con- ducted without any sort of concealment. I have heard this place described by a prohibitionist as the " dumi)ing- ground " for the whole State, in which legal-moral restraints are thrown off. But it is not the only point at which the liquor law has hitherto been openly and persistently resisted. At I .eavenworth (population 21,000) the saloons, if not actually announcing themselves on the street-front, are numerous enough and not difficult to find. Access to them is unchecked, and no con- cealment is observed ; drink is supplied at an open bar of the usual description. This place has from the first been opposed to prohibition. There have been times when efforts were made to enforce the law there, and when strangers would have been puzzled to find a dram-shop. A resident in the neighbourhood has told me that, even at such times, he could and did obtain liquor in Leavenworth, both at the drug-store and the hotel. Such efforts, however, have been short-lived ; saloons have usually been conducted openly and without interference. vSuch was the case at the time of my visit, when I was told that they numbered about 125. 'I'hey })ay a monthly fine, amounting l)ractically to a licence-fee. Some years ago, a State [)oIice force was established at Leavenworth under the Act of 1887, for the ])ur[)ose of enforcing the li(|Uor law ; but the result was not a success. According to positive statements made to me, the powers of the Police Commissioners were used less for their 138 Am/-:k/cax Liquor Laws. legitimate purpose than for the exercise of political pressure at elections. At Atchison (14,000), I was assured that a similar state of things ])revailed. Wichita (24,000) also ai)peau(l to be notorious for its successful resistance to the law. In the latter place, I heard of a large number of saloons, which were allowed to run on payment of a periodical fine. The following extract relating to these towns is taken from a letter I received from a prominent lawyer, who has long resided in Kansas and is an ardent sup})orter of prohibition ; it may be taken as expressing the views of those prohibitionists who recognise the real state of affairs in these places, but who are not thereby shaken in their allegiance to the cause. His contention that even here prohibition has been highly beneficial would, of course, be enti"^' rejected by many: — " Three or four of our larger towns — like Atchison, Leavenworth, P'ort Scott, Kansas City (Kansas), and Wichita -cannot be said to pay this law a high respect, though, when I remember the present condition of these towns, as compared wiih the condition before this law went into effect, I am prepared to prove a magnificent forward march. These last towns I name are on or near the border- lines, across which no law similar to ours exists. Thus, at Atchison, Leavenworth, and Kansas City (Kansas), Missouri is reached by merely crossing the river or an imaginary line, and Missouri is one of the worst liquor-cursed States in the Union, Wichita is largely affected by the proximity of the Indian Territory,* with which the city has its principal business relations, and Fort Scott is settled by foreigners largely engaged in the mining business. In fact, the populations of Atchison, Leavenworth, and Kansas City (Kansas are overwhelmingly foreign ; Leavenworth is affected by the large military post there and by the presence of the State Penitentiary. These towns are certainly conspicuous, as compared with other towns in the State, for their trifling with the law. but, as I said before, even in these towns the change has been a radical one — one which only an old settler can readily appreciate.' * I'he dislancc of Wichita from the nearest point of the Indian Territory is nearly lifty miles in a straight line. Atchison, Leavenworth, and Fort Scott, as well as Kansas City, are all close to the eastern border. Kansas. 139 Another ol)server of social and i)olitical conditions in tliis State, also a friend of j)rohil)ition, expressed to me his beUef that there had recently si)rung up in Kansas a general spirit of indifference to legal observance, contcmjioraneously with the growth of the '' populist " movement in ])olitits ; and he attributed the existing want of respect for the liquor law in part to this cause. The two remaining cities — Topeka (population 3 [,000), the State capital, and Lawrence (10,000), having the State university — have a different character from the other five. In neither of them can the law be openly violated with imjumity. Of the extent to which it was violated in secret I had somewhat conflicting accounts. It would not be difficult to collect a number of instances in which licjuor has been illegally bought and sold in these towns ; but, on the whole, I found little direct evidence that this state of things prevailed extensively, though I met persons who were confident that much illegal drinking went on, and that a resident, though not a stranger, would have little difficulty in finding means to get behind the law, A resident of Topeka, who appeared to mc to speak with knowledge and fairness, gave to that city a character which, if true, would go far to justify, so far at least as Topeka was concerned, the enthusiastic language of an ex-Governor — " I affirm, with earnestness and emphasis, that this State is to-day the most temperate, orderly, sober community of peoi)le in the civilised world." My informant certainly claimed for Topeka no less h"gh a position than this. Topeka has a " metropolitan " police force under the law of 1887. The Police Commissioners, I was assured, had con- sistently done their duty, so had the county attorney. Public opinion appears to be very strong and to tolerate no laxity. The Women's Christian Temperance Union is also full of zeal. 'I'he two Police Commissioners last appointed by the Covernor were said to he anti-prohibitionists ; but they were speedily brought to book at a public meeting of citizens, and ex^jressed 4. 140 American Liquor Laws. their intention and determination to carry out the law with all rigour. Such, indeed, is the vigilance of the public, that I am told it would hardly he possible for the officials to slack off the work of enforcement, even if they wished to do so. The result, my informant assures me, is that the law is thoroughly enforced; "joints" are said to be very scarce; druggists do not sell li(|uor except in conformity with the legal regulations. A few of the latter, who were found guilty of irregularities, have lost their permits. To a limited extent it is admitted that intoxicating liquor is sold in the guise of " sweet cider/' " hop tonic," and other pscudo-" temperance " drinks. 'i'he same resident, furthermore, tells me that there are no bawdy-houses or gambling-houses in Topeka, })ublic opinion being directed with equal vigilance and success against gambling and the social evil, neither of which is tolerated or winked at. If a prostitute is found she is punished, and has to leave the place. A gambling-house had been discovered shortly before my visit and was immediately shut up. As an instance of the real sobriety of the place, my attention was drawn to the fact that, during the great excitement of the recent political crisis, when the members of one political party barricaded themselves in the State House against the other, and serious fighting seemed imminent, there- was no drunken- ness whatever, not a single arrest. Without attempting wholly to decide between conflicting views as to the degree in which the licjuor traffic is slill secretly carried on, it is safe to accord to Topeka a (juite exceptional, if not unitjue, position in this respect among other towns of its size throughout the country. Lawrence is a much smaller place, but here, too, I found no evidence of much illegal trade in drink. Liquor, no doubt, is to some extent obtained in clubs, and there may probably exist here and there a "dive," but the business is secret and fugitive, and it would be difficult for a stranger to get sight of "^ JiA.VS.lS. 141 it. Certainly there seems to be no sign here of anything amounting to a break down of the law, and general opinion appears to favour it.* In both places licjuor can easily be got from Kansas City in large and small quantities for private use ; and drink ing- parties sometimes are given, one man getting in a supi)ly of whisky, and entertaining his friends. Apart from questions immediately concerning the enforce- ment of the law, much has been said and written about the general results of prohibition in Kansas. A detailed examina- tion of all that has been published on this subject on both sides would be beyond the scope of this sketch. A few observations mu), lowever, be offered on the leading points in which it is claimed that the decision taken in 1880 has worked for good. One point often urged for legal prohibition is its influence as an educator of the young in the direction of a sentiment that total abstinence as a personal habit is right, and that the use of intoxicating liquor in any form or (juantity as a beverage is wrong. This view was strongly presented to me by a professor at the Kansas State University, a man whose position in close contact with young men would naturally give weight to his opinion ; a prohibitionist, but, I think, a man on his guard against forming hasty conclusions. He argued that those of the young generation — growing up from boyhood without ever seeing oj)en saloons, knowing that the traffic in strong drink was treated by the laws of their State as a crime, just as much as stealing, having never seen drinking either in their homes or out of doors, and only hearing of it as some- thing socially disreputable, as well as physically and morally injurious— were already fostering a habit of mind in regard to * The first person I spoke to in Lawrence was drunk ; it was dark, and I asked him the way to the hotel. But to draw general conclusions from this little incident Would be very unfair. 1 42 American Liquor Laws. the wliulu ([ucslion, which, in ihc lon^:; run, would bring pc(>i)le who manufactured or traded in li([Uor to be generally regarded as criminals, in the same sense in which thieves and other rogues are so regarded. In support of his view, he assured me that the young men in hiis own class were, without exce[)tion, in sympathy with tlie existing law ; and that he found the feeling among them in regard to the use of liciuor quite different from that which prevailed among young men in Baltimore and the J^^ast. Whatever may be thought of the professor's argument and of his forecast (and without speculating how far the youthful mind, thus educated, might be in danger of disturbance on this question, through subsequent contact with the outer world*), there can be no denial of \\\'^ fact ; and probably it would hardly be disputed by any unbiassed person that prohibition was having this influence on many of the rising generation. It may, perha[)s, be traced in the apparently increased stability of the law (already mentioned) in the public mind outside of party politics. But, upon this question of the educational bearing of prohibition, it must be said that much weight is attached by its opponents to the demoralising effects of a law which treats as a crime what many do not regard as wrong ; which is often scandalously disregarded ; and the transgressors of which, even when their offence is proved in court, in many cases cannot be convicted and punished. Such a law, it is urged, breeds contempt of all law.f As things now are, it certainly is not a very uncommon thing to hear )oung men discussing the com- parative ease or difficulty of obtaining beer and whisky in different i)arts of the State, and the various methods adopted * Nor do I enter upon the ethical question how far the act of selling a glass of beer is analogous to that of stealing a loaf. (.SVt-, asio the anomalous character of repressive liquor legislation, Appendix I., p. 409.) t A well-known social reformer, residing in another State, remarked to me (speaking of liquor laws generally), that nothing had done so much as they had to discredit law in the public mind, and engender a spin' of disregard for its observance. Kansas. m:. for evading the law, in a way wliich supplies arguments to those who hold that the educational influence of prohibition is not universally beneficial. Attempts have been made to show that the Kansas law has Airthered material prosperity and the growth of population. Opponents argue that it has had just ,ie contrary effect and both parties are equally positive in their statements.' individual cases are mentioned of persons who have left the State on account of prohibition, and of others whoiii it has brought into the State (especially young men making their start m life, whose parents fear the danger of the saloon). There can be no doubt that the law has, in some degree had both an expulsive and an attractive force, but it would be difticult to prove how the balance lies. Kansas has, of course immensely increased in population and wealth during the past twenty or thirty years, but so have other newly settled States and, even if it be shown that Kansas has advanced more rapidly than this or that other State which has not banished the saloon, there is a long step from the admission of this fact to the proof that it is the result of prohibition. The census returns supply, perhaps, the only positive facts yet known on which a general conclusion could be based ; and they do not appear to support such a theory. According to them, the pojuilation of Kansas increased 173 per cent, froin 1870 to 1880, and 43 per cent, iiom 1880 to 1890 (prohibition commenced in 1881). During the later years not only did the growth sufTfer a check, l)ut in 1889 and 1890 there was an actual falling off. ^S^o .yt),096 (U.S. census). '^^5 1,268,530 (State census). ^^86 1,406,738 1887 1 888 1S89 1890 1,514,578 1,518,552 1,464,914 J, ,» », To attempt from these figures, uns s). 427,096 (U.S. census) upported by oth er 144 American Liquor Laws. evidence, to deduce conclusions for or against prohibition would be absurd ; and, indeed, the wliole question of the effects of this system ui)on wealth and [)opulation is a very intricate one, requiring far more examination than it has received from those who express themselves with most con- fidence upon it. It is notorious that Kansas has been and is affected by economic conditions for which it can hardly be suggested that the lifjuor law is responsible. But the good effect niost freely and frequendy claimed for prohibition in Kansas has been the diminution of crime. This result has been publicly claimed for it by men of hij^h official position in the State, whose utterances have been widely circulated. Thus, for example, (iovernor John A. Martin said: " The abolition of the saloon has enormously diminished crime." Attorney-General Jiradford said: ''It" {i.e. pro- hibition) " is depopulating our i)enitcntiary, and reducing crime and pauperism to a minimum." In the Capital Common- wealth., of Topeka, it was stated : " Drunkenness and crime have diminished 80 per cent, since the saloons were closed in Kansas." In a pamphlet, published in England in 1889 (" Does Prohibition Prohibit?"), it was stated that many of the jails in Kansas were practically empty, " and all show a marked falling off in the numl)er of prisoners." It may be a fact that prohibition has tended to check crime in this State ; but it would not be easy to prove that it has done so to any large extent. Certainly the census returns of the prison population appear to show that the statements quoted above claim too much. According to the United States census, Kansas had more prisoners in its penitentiary and county jails in proportion to its population in 1890 than it had in 1880, viz. : — 1890,* 946 prisoners per million inhabitants; 1880, 893 prisoners per million. Moreover, of all the twelve States in the " Northern Central " group, Kansas The census was taken on the ist of June. ^AA'SAS. M5 ^•tands second bur' 7""^ ^"'" "'■"''^" ^^^^^^^^^^ by far the thSt n ^ ^ " """^' ^^'^' ^'^"^^^ ^'-- next with 3:3 T,;r.;o°H 'r' "'""'^ ^'"^'^^"^^ -^''^^^ Kansas showed Ix^t^r^^^^^^^^ '^^ "'^^°- ^» ^SSot penitentiary prisoners, standi . ^^ d" "^ ""' " -"^^"'^ . The following table show t e 1 ^ 'e^: !" "'"r"' Pnsoners confined in the Kansas StateZi^u:^ Tf''^' ^' i^or a number of years inrl I. 1 /"^^ ^ ^nitcntiary, at Lansmg, omcial biennial re^on's •- "''' °" '"" '^''^^ ^'-" - ^he iMily average number of prisoner, .lurin. the year ending Tune joih '^ >^^'^' i'V9 ... 1S80 .. >» >> j> >> >} >> I* ending June 30th „ >) it >» it M )> it >> »> >> M *> M >> II >) J) I8S5 IS86 I8S7 I8SS I8S9 1890 1891 1892 5o« 647 764 «J7 938 S92 889 894 902 of aclditiona. ceo „ r^ -" -^-' "- P-.ion '««°. 377 liad used lim.or i . 1 ' ' ■'""" •'°"'' ^u iKiiior as a beverage, and 228 Iiad not * Kvery one of the twelve Ship« :„ ,1 ■ •a lower ratio of prisoners th „ th^a e I ^ 'T''' l'""^ '" "■"-■ — and the average for this grou, is owe th'.Uh.', f ' 'i""^'' ■''•"'« ' -e groups i,„o .hich the c,.,',„tr, is l^! t!^:^:^^::'' i4<3 American Liquor L.urs. n used it. For the biennial period from 1.S88 to iSyo the corresponding figures were 524 using h(iuor, and 224 abstainers. The sixth biennial report of the State Reform School at 'I'opeka, to which juvenile offenders under sixteen years of age are committed, siiows that the number of inmates was, on June 30th, 1890, 186 ; on June 30th, 1892, 220. The following iigures, showing the number of admissions to the State Reform School in every year since its opening, are sup[)lied to nie by the superintendent of the school : — 1881 ... 18S2 ... 188;, .. 18S4 ... 1885 ... 1886 ... 49 50 63 44 27 46 1S87 .. 1888 .. 1889 .. 1.S90 .. 1891 .. 1892 .. 121 80 63 106 69 117 The Board of Trustees of the State Charitable Institutions, in their report for the last biennial period, stated that the Reform School, as well as other institutions under their control, was '• full to overflowing,'' and they strongly urged that its capacity should be increased. Much significance has been attached to the fact, publicly slated, that a certain number of county jails were empty. This statement, however, which has been repeatedly brought forward as an argument for prohibition, loses some of its significance when it is remembered that the whole po[)ulation of Kansas is about 1,500,000, averaging seventeen to the square mile in 1890, distributed in 106 counties ; and that the average number of prisoners per county in 1890 was only about four, although, as already shown, the ratio of the jail population was then higher in Kansas than in any other State in the .same grou[). On June 1st, 1890, according to the census return,* 21 counties in Kansas (one-fifth of the wliole number) had no prisoners in their jails ; and at the same time in Nebraska 30 county jails were empty (out of a total of 90 counties). " Census Uulleiin, Nu. 95, p. 10. Kansas. '47 tlic crs. .1 at age on sions T, arc ) 1 utions, iiat the ■ontrol, bat its ublicly This or ward luant-e nsas is \\\\\ki in average ut four, ion was ic same return, had no e\)raska les). * Mr. J. A. 'I'routinan, in an address delivered (Mi May i5tli, 1S90, as president of tlie Kansas State 'rein[)erancc Union, and afterwards i)ul)lished as a i)anii)hlet, draws a comparison between this State and Nebraska as regards the [)enitcntiary i)opulation, from which he dechices inferences favourable to prohibition. His argument is based on the statement that in 1S79 Kansas iiad 917 convicts in the penitentiary, a statement entirely contrary to the oflicial return, which, as has already appeared, shows a daily average of 538 prisoners in that year. A similar comparison made by him between the same two States as regards boys in reform s( hools cannot be taken as a basis for any such inference, until the conditions of commitment to these institutions are examined and proved to be similar. In the same pamphlet a comparison is instituted between Topeka and a number of high-licence and low-licence cities, as regards arrests for crimes ; and a table is printed, purporting to show the population, the number of saloons, and the number of arrests in each place during the previous year, and showing a Vv_ry large excess of arrests in all these places over those in Topeka in proportion to population. It is very probable that the amount of crime in Topeka is exceptionally low ; but the figures in the table do not appear to be in every case accurate. Omaha, for example (the largest town in the high-licence State of Nebraska, which has often been unfavourably compared with Kansas as regards its treatment of the lic|uor ([uestion), is credited with 12,543 arrests, which is declared to be more than 8,000 in excess of the number which it ought to show, the ratio of arrests in Topeka being taken as the basis. The populations, which the table attributes to these two cities respectively, and on which the above calculation is based, are: — Topeka ... ... ... ... ... ... 45,000 Omaha ... ... ... 110,000 But, according to the United States census, taken almost K 148 America!^ Liquor Laws. at the very time when this statement was made, the figures are (roundly) : — Topeka ... ... ... ... ... ... 31,000 Omaha ... ... ... ... ... ... 140,000 If the latter figures are substituted for the former, the dis- parity in the arrests is materially reduced, though it is still great. As regards the 12,500 arrests in Omaha, it must 1)C supposed that this figure is official. It is presumably for the year 1889. The corresponding figure for 1891, which I take from the annual official report, is 7,281 — which, if the former number is correct, shows an e.xtraordinary diminution in two years. If the official census i)opulation is taken, and the return of arrests for 1891 is substituted, as regards Omaha, for the much higher figure given in the table, on this basis the ratio of arrests in the two towns works out at [)ractically the same figure."^ The number of persons in Kansas who paid the United States special tax on retail licjuor dealers and retail dealers in malt licjuors in the last two years was : — t VEAU KNDING JUNK 30rU. 1^91 h^}>}>(> 1892 2,500 faking the population of the State at 1,500,000, this would give one retail licjuor dealer to 450 inhabitants in the former year, and one to 600 in the latter. I have no information as to the number of persons holding permits to sell licjuor for special purposes under the Slate law, and cannot estimate how many paid the United States tax with the purpose of selling lii^uor illegally. Tax was paid in the latter year by 432 persons as retail dealers in malt li(juors only. * .Since the above paragraph was written, I have received from the office of the Mayor of Omaha the ollkial figures uf arrests for all offences in that city, viz. : for 1S89, 8,449, and for 1890, 8,113. The number of arrests attributed to Omaha by the Kansas writer is, consecjuently, about 50 per cent, in excess of the olticial figure, and (it must be presumed) is to that extent erroneous. t Sec theofticial " Statistical Abstract of the United States " for 1891 (p. 214) and 1892 (p. 218), 149 ould nier on as )r for how lling rsons )m the 'fences iber of about 1) is to )r 1891 CIIAPTKR IX. IOWA. (I'rohil)ition.) In Iowa, as a i)roliil)ition State, the traffic in intoxicating li([uors — except for certain specified ptiri)Oses, and then only tinder mintitc restrictions — is absohitely forbidden. 'The original prohibitory hiw, adopted in 1855, exempted cider and native wines, and the cxem])tion was afterwards extended to beer. In subseqtient years, tiiough the sale of s[M'rits remained contraband, tlicy were largely sold tinder cover of the permission to sell the lighter intoxicants. In 1882, a prohibitory amend- ment to the Constitution, having been carried in the State Legislature, was put to the [)opular vote and adopted by a large majority. Ihit in consequence of certain irregularities of a technical nature, the amendment, as adoj^ted, was declared by the Supreme Court to be invalid ; whereui)on the Republicans, who were the jnrty in [)owcr, undertook to i)ass a law giving effect to the j)0pular decision.* 'i'he existing prohibitory law of Iowa was the result. It has, indeed, since undergone some modifications in detail, and in 1890 it was repealed and re-enacted, with modifications relaxing, to some extent, the conditions governing the sale of liquors for certain purposes by druggists ; but in its most important features the law remains substantially the same as when it was first enacted in 1884. The terms of the existincf general enactment are : — '& &^ " No person shall manufacture for sale, sell, keep for sale, give away, exchange, barter, or dispense any intoxicating liquor,t for any purpose whatever, otherwise than is provided in this Act. * A belief exists — I believe, well founded — that the failure of the amendment was not altogether the result of accident. t Intoxicating liquor means " alcohol, ale, wine, beer, spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors, and all intoxicating liquors whatever," ^so American Tjovor F.aws. Persons holding permits, as herein j)r()\ idcd, shall be authorised to sell and dispense intoxicating liquors for ])harmaccutical and medical purposes, and alcohol for specified chemical mechanical {sic) purposes, and wine for sacramental purposes, and to sell to registered pharmacists and manufacturers of proprietary medicines, for use in compounding medicines, and to permit-holders for use and re-sale by them, for the purposes authorised by this Act, but for no other purposes whatever," This provision, however, "shall not be construed to prevent licensed physicians from dispensing in good faith such liquors as medicine to patients actually sick and under their treatment at the time of such dispensing." An application for a permit has to be made by sworn petition, stating, among other matters, that the a])plicant is a registered pharmacist in business as such,* and is not the keeper of a hotel, eating-house, saloon, or place of public amusement ; " that he is not addicted to the use of intoxicating liquors as 'i, beverage, and that he desires a permit to purchase, keep, and sell such licpiors for lawful purposes only.'"t A jiermit-bolder is required to execute a bond in $i,ooo with sureties, by way of security for his observance of the law, and to give an undertaking on oath that he will not furnish liquor except as provided by law ; and, especially, that he will not furnish it to any person who is not cither known to him personally, or duly identified ; nor to any minor, intoxicated person, or habitual drunkard; and that he will make full returns of all sales of liquor made by him. Ihe application for a permit comes before the District Court of the county, after it has been duly published. The court has to hear any remonstrances or objections, and, before granting the permit, has to satisfy itself that the statements in the petition are true, that the applicant is a proper person to be entrusted with a permit, and that, "considering the population of the locality and the reasonable necessities and convenience of the people, such permit is proper." When several permits arc applied for in the same locality, the court may grant or refuse any or all of the applications as will best subserve the public interest. Until i8go, the permit had to be annually renewed ; but it now * In a township where no pharmacist obtains a permit, it may be granted to one " discreet person " not a pharmacist. t Until 1890, the application had to be supported l)y a petition from one-third of the freehold voters of the place. l(t]VA. I^I of lear mil, hat and ible er." lurt DCSt low ited mm contimies in for( e (unless revoked; for sucli period as may be specitied thereon. On proof of the violation of the law, the court is rcciuired to revoke the permit, and, after repeated offences, a pharmacist is liable to forfeit his certificate of rei;istration. The law surrounds the sale of li(|Uor lay pharmacists with regulations of extraordinary minuteness. A permit-holder may sell or deliver Ii([uor only on a written rec|uest, "stating the applicant is not a minor and the residence of the signer, for whom and whose use the liquor is re([uired, the amount and kind recjuired, the actual purpose for which the recjuest is made and for what use desired, and his or her true name and residence, and, whore numbered, by street and number, if in a city, and that neither the applicant nor the person for whose use rc([ucstcd habitually uses into\i( ating liquors as a beverage, and the re(|uest shall be signed by the appli- cant by his own true name and signature, and attested by the permit-holder who receives and fills the request by his own true name and signature in his own handwriting. liut the rec|uest shall be refused, notwithstanding the statement made, unless the permit- holder has reason to believe said statement to be true, and in no case {sic unless the ))erm, lolder filling it jicrsonally knows the person a|)plying -that he is not a minor, that he is not intoxicated, and that he is not in the habit of using intoxicating li(|uors as a beverage ; or, if the applicant is not so personally known to the permit-holder, before filling the said order, or delivering the liquor, he shall require iilentification, and the state- ment of a reliable and trustworthy person, of good character and habits, known personally to him, that the applicant is not a minor, and 's not in the habit of using intoxicating li(iu()rs as a beverage, and is worthy of credit as to the truthfulness of the statements in the application, and this statement shall be signed by the u itness in his own true name and handwriting, stating his residence correctly." The permit-holder is to make a return every two months to the county auditor of all such requests, together with a sworn state- ment that the return is complete and that no li(|uor has been otherwise sold or dispensed. He is also required to record all sales in a booic open to inspection. Penalties are provided for false statements made for the purpose of obtaining liquor. The following penalties arc also enacted : — Selling to a minor (except on the written order of his parent, 1=^2 American I.iovor Laws. guardian, or family physician), or to an intoxicated [)erson, or to a drunkard— fine $roo. Selling without a permit, or keeping liquor with intent to sell illegally- first offence, fine $50 to $100; subse(|uent offence, fine $300 to $500 and imprisonment not exceeding six months. Premises where liquor is sold or kej^t for sale against the law are declared a nuisance, which may be abated and an injunction obtained ; and anyone convicted of keeping such a nuisance is to be fined from $300 to $1,000. Violation of an injunction is punishable by imprisonment up to six months, and if repeated, a year. The proceeds of fine? are given to the school fund. Payment of the United States liquor tax is evidence of a breach of the State law. A justice of the peace, on sworn information, may issue a warrant for search and seizure. Liquor seized may be declared by judgment of the court to be forfeited, and is then to be destroyed. y\ny person found in a state of intoxication is to be arrested, and, on conviction, is to be fined $10 or imprisoned for thirty days. But the punishment may be wholly or partly remitted, upon the prisoner stating on oath when, where, and from whom he received the liquor. No money can be recovered on any contract for liquor sold in violation of the law, and money actually paid for such liquor may be recovered back. Peace officers are bound to give information of violation of the law. on pain of forfeiting their office and being fined from $10 to $50. ]jy a ]irovision, since declared by the United States Supreme Court to be invalid as an attempt to regulate inter-State commerce, any common carrier or other person who transports liquor within the State for any person without a certificate from the county auditor, stating that the consignee is authorised to sell it, is declared liable to a tine of $roo ; and all packages of lit|uor transported are recjuired to be plainly and correctly labelled. Every person who is directly or indirectly concerned in keeping a club-room or other place in which li([uor is received or kept for the purpose of use, gift, barter, or sale, or for distribution or division among the members of any club or association by any means what- ever, and every person so using, etc., is to be fined from $100 to $500 or imprisoned from one to six months. Courts and jurors are required to construe the law so as to prevent lolVA. DO in re IK' nt evasion, and to cover the act of giving as well as selling by un- authorised persons. Anyone who, by illegal manufacture or sale of liquor, causes the intoxication of any person is required to compensate any person who takes charge of him. Any wife, child, parent, guardian, employer, or other person, injured in person, property, or means of support by any intoxicated person, or in conscc[uence of his intoxication, habitual or otherwise, has a right of action for damages against the person who by selling lit[Uor caused the intoxication. The enforcement of the law here, as elsewhere, depends on the direction and strength of local popular sentiment. In the small towns and rtiral townships, especially in the central portions of the State, there does not ai)pear to be, as a general rule, any widespread resistance to the law. How far this fart is due to tlie force of the law, and how far to the natural absence of any considerable demand for liquor in rural districts, is a matter on wliich opinions are divided ; but as regards the fact itself, there is practical unanimity among both the friends and the opponents of prohibition.* A traveller miglit })ass through large portions of the State without finding any oppor- tunity to satisfy his thirst for stimulants. The remarks which follow are directed to a consideration of the facts about prohibition in the larger towns.! * A clergyman, who certainly does not believe in general prohibition as a solution of the drink question, mentioned to me a small town with a population of about 3,300, which was personally known to him, and in which prohibition had, in his opinion, worked great i^ood. It had closed the saloons, and the local sentiment had warranted its efficient enforce- ment. It appeared, in short, to be just such a place as would make use of local option. f In 1885 a report was made by Senator Sutton on the working of prohibition in Iowa, which may be of some interest, though it refers to a time now somewhat remote. An article on the report appeared in the CJiristian Union (New York) on December 24th, 18S5. The report apparently embodies replies to questions received from a number of places and from persons of different opinions and callings. The general result is said to show the existence of 1,837 open saloons (an increase of 31 since ^S4 Am ERIC AX fjQUOR f^WVS. The Stale of Iowa extemis over 55,475 sijuaro miles,* and contained, according to the census of 1890, a })opulation of 1,911,896, an average of 34 inhabitants to the square mile. Tt is a farming country, containing no very large cities ; the chief city, Des Moines, has about 50,000 inhabitants. There are ten towns with a population exceeding 10,000. Only 20 per cent, of the i)opu1ation of the State live in towns or districts of more than 3,000 inhabitants. Iowa is an older State than some of the other central States, and more conservative; " populist'' views have made conijiaratively little headway in it. It has a good many (lermans and Irish, some Scandinavians in the north, but not nearly so many of this race as are found in Wisconsin and Minnesota. The State is bounded along its eastern and western sides by the IMississi[)pi and Missouri rivers, on one or other of which are situated seven out of its ten principal towns, in immediate proximity to States subject to a licence law. These riverside towns are those in which the prohibitory law has l)een most persistently and openly violated, a circumstance which has often been attributed to their proximity to places where drinking is lawful, on the principle that evil communica- tions corrupt good manners. That such proximity may have had some effect in stimulating the demand for liquor among proliibition) ; open saloons were reported in 67 counties ; and the li(|uor business was taxed or licenseti by the municipal authorities in 25 towns. In 13 counties a diminution of saloons and of drunkenness was reported ; in 21 no improvement or a deterioration. Six cities of the second class, 16 towns of between 1,000 and 2,000 inhal)itants, and 38 smaller towns had previously adopted prohibition under the local option law ; in these places the new law was said to be a benefit. Prohil)ition " has done great ^ood wherever the field was prepared for it, and where the people wanted it, and wouKl elect public officers to enforce it, and has restricted the traffic in places like Iowa City and Muscatine, even where only a minority favour it, but where that minority is determined and aggressive." Else- where (the report went on) prohibition only does harm, and the best relief is local option and high licence. * Slightly less than England and Wales, I I loU'A. :5D the inhabitants of the riverside towns on the Iowa side seems hkcly ; but, on the other hand, it also i)rovided them witli facihtics (by merely crossing the river) for satisfying that demand without breaking the laws of their State. The success of prohibition in ('ambridge (Massachusetts) is thought by many to be largely due to its proximity to lioston, which supplies the Cambridge demand. The confinement of saloons within a particular quarter of Minneai)olis is not found to render the law prohibiting them in the other ([uarters in- operative. I'ollowing these analogies it might have been supposed that the fact of Council liluffs (for example) being connected by a bridge over the Missouri with Omaha, where saloons are licensed, would have rendered the enforcement of prohibition not more difficult, but easier, in the former i)lace. In the riverside towns the law at the present time is generally and openly violated, as is fully admitted by j)ro- hibitionists who are at all familiar with facts. At Daven- port there is no sort of concealment. .\t the i)rinci[)al hotel the " lunch-room " opens out of the billiard-room. It consists of an ordinary bar without any screen or curtain. It is the same with the saloons in the town. I'oards announcing lager beer and other licjuors are hung out on the street front. The bars are clearly seen from the street. Licjuors of all kinds are set out in bottles in the front windows. At the time when I visited this town handbills were placed about in the hotel bearing the following announcement : — " Grand Mascpierade Ball given by the Saloon-keepers and Bar-tenders of 1 )aven- port, at Wiggers' Hall, on Saturday evening, Jan. 14th, 1893. Music by Otto's Orchestra. A good time guaranteed to all who participate. Tickets, 50 cents. Come one ! C'ome all I ! Prizes awarded ! " Under licence, lic^uor was sold in about fifty places in Davenport ; the number of such places now approaches three hundred. There is a "beverage licence" issued under a city ordinance, which ])ractically amounts to a regulation to some extent of the li(juor business. In Scott 15^' Amf.kkwx Liquor Laws, County, which includes Davenport, the proliihitory law has never been strictly enforced. A large proportion of the population is (lernian, in general a steady, law-abiding com- munity, bu, steadily opposed to prohibition. There was at one time a project of establishing a State ])olicc organisation, independent of the localities, for enforcing the liquor law ; a warning came from I )avenport that to attempt to carry out the scheme there would be to risk the lives of the men sent to enforce the law. On the adoption of prohibition the German community, which had been solidly Republican, went over to the Democrats. Upon the j)olitical aspect of prohibition in this State more remains to be said. In Davenport it is said that more drinking goes on now than was customary before 1884 ; but still there is not a great amount of drunkenness, and there is more prosperity and less crime in Scott County than in Polk County, which contains Des Moines, where the law has not been so openly violated.* The ineffectiveness of prohibition seems to have been more notorious in Davenport than in the other towns on the eastern border of the State ; but I am assured that at Burlington and Dul)U(iue a similar state of affairs prevails.! On the western side are two considerable towns, Sioux City and Council Bluffs, in both of which the trade in li(]uor is carried on quite openly, and is recognised, in the face of the State law, by the local authorities, and regulated by certain municipal rules. It is even made subject to a kind of licensing system. Sioux City has a population of about 38,000, and ranks as the second city in the State. By a municipal * Number of convictions for crime : — Polk County (population, 65,400), 1890, 83; 1891, 98. Scott County (population, 43,100), 1890, 18; 1 891, 48. t Muscatine (11,500), a riverside town between Davenport and Bur- lington, was in May, 1893, the scene of a serious outrage, when the residences of three citizens, who hati been taking conspicuous part in a campaign against tlie saloons in that town, were partially destroyed by dynamite. . J on- A. 157 i ordinance the li(|uor dealers are roni[)elled to make a monthly l)ayment to the city. 'I'his i)ayment, l)eing exacted as a fme for violation of the law, is not in form a licence fee, but in effect o[)erates as such, for, the payment having been made, no further proceedings are taken to vindicate the law. The object of the arrangement is twofold : to secure a control over the trade, which under an inoperative prohibitory law is wanting ; and to raise a revenue for municipal [)uri)oses. In Iowa the duty of enforcing the State law rests mainly with the sheriff of the county and his ofticers, and fines are paid to the county treasury. Fines levied for breach of a municipal ordinance go to the municipality. Therefore, by i)assing an ordinance ostensibly for the i)urpose of enforcing the State law, a municipality is enabled to institute proceedings thereunder, and appropriate to itself the fines. 'I'he arrangement thus introduced in Sioux City is obviously in fact, though not in name, a return to a licensing system in defiance of the prohibitory law of the State. Council Bluffs (2 1,500) lies on the east side of the Missouri, opposite Omaha (Nebraska) ; it is an important railway centre. The municipal limits extend to the river, but the town itself lies sovnc distance back under the bluffs, between which and the river stretches a fiat alluvial valley two or three miles wide. The saloons here are (^uite open. I counted twenty-two in about a (juarter of a mile along the main street. They number about seventy altogether in the town. They are recognised by the authorities, and each pays a monthly fine, practically amounting to a licence fee, of $52*50, of which $2*50 go to the police, and the remainder to the town for general purposes.* The following is the routine adopted : — Printed forms of complaint are filled up and sworn to in the Muni(i[)al Court, in which A \\ is charged with keeping a disorderly house in contravention of the city ordinance ; liijuor is not mentioned. * In the published numicipal accounts these payments are hicUuled in the item of 'city crime." ■S'*^ y-i Imekican Jj(,h\^k L.iirs. Tlic offciKlcr is summoned, and the sum named is taken as bail for liis appearance on the apjjointcd day. \\'hen tlie day comes he does not appear, the bail is forfeited, and the money is paid over and aj)pro|)riated as already stated. 'J'iie pro- ceedings are then dropped until the next month, when a new information is sworn, and the same course is taken again ; and so on every month, l^rohibition lias never been successfully enforced in this town. 'I'here have been times when the l)rohibitionists have made a rally and undertaken to close the saloons, but their eftbrts are said to have always resulted in an increase of drinking, and a great increase in the number of secret grog-shops. I am assured that since this quasi-licensing system has been in operation (about two years) it has worked a very great improvement in the state of the town. I inquired whether, under the existing system, a badly-conducted house would be allowed to continue doing business. The answer was that it would be closed ; the [)olice would tell the owner that he must clear out, and would not be satisfied to let him go on paying his fine like the rest. These monthly fines amount in the year in each case to $630, a fairly high-licence fee, and they have had the effect of closing many of the smaller dram-sho})S which had previously been running with little or no restriction. 'I'he following statistics are taken from the i)ublished munic:i])al rc[)orts : — Council BlufTs (population, cersus of 1890, 21,474.) \ ear ending. Marcli ist. 1889. 1892. Total numtjer of arrests., Arrests for drunkenness (cither alone or com- bined with some other offence) Arrests for violation of liquor haw 1,815 736 7 1,482 696 6 The arrests for drunkenness in Omaha during 1891 numbered 1,667 a very much smaller proportion to the pop' htion than the corresponding arrests in Council Bluffs. lI loiVA. »59 ! If the arrests in Omaha were brcnight up to the same ratio as those in the neighbouring city, they would number over 4,500, or not far short of three times the actual total. In Council Bluffs, under prohibition, the arrests for drunkenness are one to thirty-one of the poi)ulation ; in Omaha, under high-licence, one to eighty-four. Before coming to Iowa I had been told a stor\ to the effect that on Sundays it was a common thing for people to come over the river from Omaha, where the licence law demanded, and to some extent compelled, Sunday closing, for the purpose of obtaining litjuor in Council Bluffs, where no such restriction was observed. I made some incjuiries on the spot as to the truth of this statement, and received repeated confirmation of it. Small beer-shops were even set u[) just across the river for the special puri)ose of doing a Sunday trade with j)eo[)le from Omaha. The i)lan of the monthly fines, however, seems to have i)Ul a stop to this Sunday emigration. 'i'he state of Council Bluffs on Sundays had been much improved, and there had recently been few complaints of disturbances on that day, which used to be of not infre(juent occurrence. A greater measure of efficiency is justly claimed for pro- hibition in the interior of the Slate than that which it lias achieved among the riverside towns. But even in the interior, it can hardly be said to be attended with any marked success in the larger centres of |)opulation. I visited two out of the three cities in the interior whose population exceeds 10,000. In Cedar Rapids, the business is carried on much less openly than in Davenport or Council Bluffs. The saloons do not publicly proclaim themselves on the street-front ; but a prohibitionist of the place, who had been an earnest worker for the enforcement of the law, told me that there were a good many of them, and that they carried on business with little or no interference. There are "restaurants," "lunch-rooms," "oyster-bars," "eating- houses,'' etc., at intervals. When I went into one of these and i6o A.u/iK/cjy Liquor A.iirs. asked fur a glass of vvliisky, I was referred to another house two or three doors off, where I found a screen running across, which divided the premises into a front and back shop. The front part was a small lunch-bar. Through the swing-door of the screen was an ordinary saloon drinking-bar with the usual stock of whisky bottles, etc. Except that the bar was in the back part of the shop behind the screen, and that there was no reference to li(|Uor in the announcements fronting the street, no secrecy was ol)served. T' ••-e is no city ordinance in Cedar Rapids taxing the trad 'n as exists in Sioux City and Council Bluffs. There was, at one time, a talk of [)assing such an ordinance ; but the prevailing opinion was against it. 1 was informed that the law was at fust well enforced ; but only for a short time. A gentleman, having the management t)f one of the largest business undertakings here, told me that, in his opinion, the law when enforced had been beneficial ; he men- tioned, particularly, the case of the coopers employed in his business, who are piece-workers, and who, he said, were found to take " off-days " less fre(|uently when licpior was difficult to obtain. The law has been greatly di.scredited in Cedar Rapids by the manccuvres of " shysters " (low attorneys), who have used it for the pur])Ose of levying blackmail. I was told by a prominent i)rohibitionist that these individuals constitute also a great obstacle to the efficient prosecution of legal proceedings by commencing collusive prosecutions against li([uor-sellers. Such prosecutions are neither pressed on to conviction nor withdrawn ; and the result is that, when genuine i)roceedings are undertaken against the same offender, they are delayed and hung up because a previous prosecution is [)ending. The same gentleman informed me that the city and county officials had never, or very rarely, shown a disposition to enforce the law thoroughly. The city authorities (even if otherwise willing to act with vigour) would be discouraged by the fact that the expenses of the prosecution would fall upon the city, while loiP'A. i6i lings i'Ucrs. nor j^lings ll and Luity [force Irwiso that Kvhile tlic county would get the fines. The election of the county sheriff— whose duty it is to undertake the matter - is apt to turn, as in Maine, on the issue of the strict or slack administra- tion of the prohibitory law ; and, as a matter of fact, it is a rare thing for lliis officer to display much zeal in .sui)port of it. In Cedar Rapids, as well as in other [)lace«i, when vigorous action has been taken, it has been by the exertion and at the ex[)ense of private individuals. A zealous i)rohil)itionist, who had him- self spent much time, money, and labour on this work, and had realised the im[)0ssibility of enforcing a law of this kind by l)rivate action unsu[)ported by official goodwill, told me that he had been brought to the conclusion that he would rather now spend !*ioo in prosecuting an officer for not doing his duty than a single dollar in [proceeding against a saloon-keeper for breaking the law. In Des Moines, the official capital and chief city of the State, and in Polk County, which comprises it, the conditions are said to be more favourable for making prohibition effective than in any other part of the State, and Des Moines has generally been regarded and held forth as the town where the law has been most firmly and successfully enforced. This probably is true ; but it cannot be denied that the enforcement is now very imperfect.* There are no open saloons, proclaiming themselves as such upon the street-front ; but dramshops are not ku-king, li([Uor is readily sold by druggists, and prohibitionists themselves fully admit that people who want drink can satisfy themselves without difficulty. Public ojjinion does not call for any active measures — even in Des Moines — for supi)ressing the trade beyond a certain point. As long as things go on quietly and the law is not violated with too much openness, the authorities are content ; nor are steps taken to search for law-breaking. "Spasmodic attempts have been made from time * The statement has been published that, whereas Des Moines gave a majority of 1,200 in favour of the prohibitory amendment in 1882, in 18S7 it i;ave a majority of 200 for the Democratic State ticli>rtanl j'leinent in ( (*nsiderin;^ the prospect of the < <)iiliniian< c ol this piineiple in Iowa as a general le;^islative eiia* tnieiil. 'i he Kepiil) li( ans aetween the |);nties. Ill process nl tiiiH-, the (iitliusia^in \vlii(h carried it (eased to i\in at hi^li pressure; the i:ner,i;y ( the issue out ol their platform. 'I'hey have heen Iwiee dele.ltefl on It in the ele< tion for (iovcrnor ; and many of their |)arty ;ire ajjaiiist it. In the- reeent I'residt.'nl iai ele'tioii hSi^j;, when prohihilion dis- appeared Iroiii the proL^r.nnuu- and was i^^ioicd as an issue, the ki:pul)lieans had a ;^ood m.ijoiity in Icnva. Tlu-'y have, therelf)re, strf)n|.^ motives for droppin;j it out ol the list ol party issues in Slate pohtits; espe( ially as the \s.i\c ol piohihitoi) enthusiasm has llc to c-U.-c;! their ciinrjidiile lor (jovc-rnor al tw(» MK;ces>iivc c-lcctions, they could iiol ^^i t ii m.ijorily in tin; !,c^'isl,tliirc, and seciirt: repeal. The ()|nr,ilioi, ' the " j^errymaixlei " vvhieh tin- ke|)uljli( aiii, a, the (jomiii.iiit party, have lieeii uIjIi; to uork to ihcir own advanta^t; -seems lo provide an ex])l;ina- lioM ol the anomaly. I hey h.ivi- lieeii enaliled to foresee- lar^e increases ol po|)iilatioii in the ceiiliai portions of the State, while 111 the ri verside- - the " slouj^h-water " (oiiiilie. it is revealed tr) them that the increase ill he less marked. In the redistriUnlion of seats, lliey endeavour lo adjust m.att- ■ •. lo thii proTp-'ctive arran^jement ol Ihe popid.uioii. It i^ needle.ss lo say that the cenlie of the Slate is the slKin^jliohl of iIk; piohi'iitionist and IN /. ;//■ wiflcsprc'.'ul (ccliii;' Ills nriscii lli.'if i^roliihitloii li.is not Iicm ;i siir(:(;ss. It l!.(; p.irty d« ' if|(-s tliiit it. is the Kr-sl ])olir,y to (Irop tli<- '|iicsti(Hi as an issue at the clcMion, it s(;(;rns h'krly that the k(|)iil)h' ans will he rctnnicfl with ;i. majority; Ijnt those npiiiJM-i:, of the p.irty who are opposed to proliihition, and ha.v(.* hitherto supported it as an ,i( t of p.irty allcji^ianee, will then l)(j free- to vote- aef:ordiii;^' to their inehn.ition';. I found a prevalent ex|jer.ta.lion ainon^ prohihitionists and others th.it prfjhihition would not survive the- next I-e^islatun-."'' The politiial attitude- of earnest iarty, to whose; lukewarm sujiport or s(;rret hostility tli<-y altriljiite the imp(,'rf(,'et eiiforc eim tit ol tin; law. Many who h.ul hitherto heen ^'ood IxepuMiems ha\'e heeii droppiii!'; off and joiniii'j, the r.'inks ol the third p.irt}', a (a* I whi'li explains the inerease in tin- nuiiier- ieal streii^Mli ot the l;ilt(-r party in lowa.i There seems no reasfjii to hejieve that this iiK cease inarks any growth of * I'li.hihilioiiists, liiii^ roartiDn l-i pioliiliiU'iii. Tin- f()ll<)V\'iii^ t.-xlrai;t fioiri an Iowa papr^r, puljiisli* '1 nficr tin- aWovc p.ir.i;.;r;ipli in llie text was wiill'-rii, Itcars upon tli'.- (|iicsli')n (liiciii.ed in it : "Sioux f"ily, la., Jan. l6. — 'Sprrjial 'l"(|i;iram to Tlir /irc.j 'I'Ihj a|(jj' .iraiK.i- ol :iii ciiilorial in tli'- 'iitui \ dlv /oin inif, ad vocatinj'^ a r'|)i;il o( iIk: )iioliil)itoi y la w in this Slati-, lias crcatr-ij a s<-ns;Uioii ol no iii'sm si/'- in lovsa. < 'onj^rctisinan I'ctkin., i-dilor ol ihe /oin mi/, was cliairinan of iIk- eoininiUcL- on |(lalforin and resolution > at ( icdar Rapids a )<.-ai' aj;o, and dicw tin.- Kepulilir in pl.itforni. wliicli was for a f;f)ntinnanf c of pio liiiiitioii. I III- /onriidl .la . pt-rsisle-ntly advocated proliiiiilion in lli'.- Iirt.* ol llaj^'ranl vi ililioii of llir I i\v in this city and portion ol tin- Sl;il'-, and it was tin; last papii llial it was supposcrj would eomc ojt lor i'-|)c;il. 'Ilic press of the- Stale \. t;ikin;^ it up, and polilici ins declare tli;it tin; liold derdaialion of .Mr. I'erkins lias severttfj tlir; Kepulilican parly fioir pro- liihition, and that it will result in tli-j adoption of a liit;li licence plae'. in its platfr)rin Ijy the l^epnlilican Slate (^)nv(.'nlion next fall." f 'IIk; vot from llic Kcpuhliciin ranks lo those i>\ tin; third j)arty. Another nspcrt of" the '|iH-stioii r'ln.iins to he iiotif (.d. Neither the Henio* r;it ; nor the h'pior sellers, ;dl!iou}^h they are respeetively the jiohticd and the natural ene-niiesol |jroliihitiarty. It has heen their " hnpahof; " to s( are away v< to tin- l)inio(iat,. W'Ik le pro hil)ili()n IS not made ;iii i , mm-, the State is still stron^dy kepuhla an ; il ii were repeale(| ;iiid out ol ih< \say, the latlrol)al)ly he ealle'l on to pay, il prohibition were reijeahal. They are exempt hom the loriiialili(rs and dilfirullies and (jianees of refusal to Vvliieh they would he exposed in making their a])|)li( ations undea- a li(( iK.e law ; nor are they suhjc t to siieh chjse ins|)eetion or so many restrjf lions in iislilutioii. iiiil iiuh a vole couM only Ik; taken after the anicndnnail ha'l hecai carrieil hy two successive Le}.;i J iturc^, a course which wouM involve a loiij^ poslp<»nenicnl of the c|ucslion. ir,.s A\iih'i<'\\' f.muoR T. \\\'s. A few \V(M(Is may 1)1- said up')!! lli(j ^cni-nil rcsiills of ])roliil)itioii in Io\va, apart from 'incstions more iiiimi-(lial(ly relating I') the law and its ctiforcc-'iiiciit. ll.as it increased or decreased drinkinf^ .'' 'I'liis is u (|iiesli()n on which opinions (hTfer, and will eoiilintie to differ, aeerjrdin^ to individual experience or |)rediiection. Prohibitionists, who reco^^nise and acknowledf^e that the law has failed to fulfil their ho|)es, f laiin that one great benefit die sii|j|>ression of the open saloon -is gained by i)rohil)ition, and (an he sec iired by no other system. The great evil, they say, is the temptation to young men to acc|nire the habit f;f meeting in ])ublic jiiacx'S and drinking together, of treating and being treated ; this is what makes yonng men take to drink. If the saloons and hotel bars are closed, the habit is not formed ; they are not attracted to shady places nor inclined to resort to subterfuges in order to obtain lifpior. from this point of view, the fact that jjeople, who go abf)iit lofjking for a dramsho]) or " hole in-the-wall," (an find it does ikH prove that prohibition is a failure. With- out reference, however, to the riverside towns, it would hardly seem that even in Des Moines the li(|iior trade has been driven into the degree of secrecy ( ontemplated by those; jirohibitionists who attach s])ecial imjjortance to the reiiujval of temptations from the y(jiing. On the other hand, the belief is jjrevalent thnt the growth of lifjiior-selling by druggists, and in jKirti( ular of the " drug store saloon," is a special and serious evil which has sj)rung up in the wake of prohibition.'^ It undoubtedly is the o|)ini(jn of many persons who are genuinely interested in the ( ause ol temj)erance that the prohibitory law has led to an a( tual increase; of drinking, owing to the greater home ( onsumjition, .and a gr( ater demand for lirjuor, es])e( ially strong spirits, by the bottle. A well-known * A particular instance: of lliis evil rclatcl to iiic was the case of a (hiij^f^ist (ioiii^ business near the collci^c at Davenport, who, shortly after till- intro'luctioii of prohihition, took lo selling whisky, ami supplyinj.' it to the collcjje hoys, lie was detccled and proseeuled, /"ir.L I Ck) resident of iow.i, holding .'i lii;^li odu:!;!! |)Osili<)ii, .iiid ;i "Iciii- pcr.iiKc iii.in," told iiir tli.'it, while tr,i\(llin;.', in tli(,' St.ilc slujilly .'irtcr tlie inirodiK lifjii of prohibition, he hceaine :i( 'in.iintcd with ;i fellow I i,i\c1I(,t, who |)ro\(,'d fo ]>(■ ;i I'.omhon whisky distiller f)n ;i l.n^c s( ;de in Kcnhifky. Asked wli.it l)ion;^hl him into ;i prohibition Sl;itc, this j^enlle- m;in replied th.il his business in this Stale was brisker than it had been before the ])rohibit()ry law fame into efleel.^ The same informant, whose duties oblip^e him to tra\il nm( h about the- State, also assured me that the inercase of drinkiii}^ in the trains was a faet within his own j)ersonal observation. I*ro- hibiti(m has f losc-d the bars at railway stations; and many travellers, esju'eially ainonj^ the "drummers" (eominereial travelh-rs), are in the habit of forestallin;^ this want by providing' thems(.'lves with a bottle of whisky a habit which is apt to lt;a(l to a too r.ipid rf)nsinn|)tion of the contents (A the bottle during the joiirru). In the diniii}^ ears, which are attached to some retend lo be able tf) judge, though it has been alleged to indicate one of tlie effeds f>f prohibition. There are said lo be several o|)ium dens in Des Moines. The fact (if it be authentic) was brought lo [)ubli(: attention in an account |)ublished in one of the lo( al news|)apers, and ])urporling to l)e a record of the experience of a sj'ecial * It .should he rf;iiu;mln;rc's, March Stli, 1S92. Tlie reporter descrilxs his experiences, how lie went itilo tlirce or four of these rh'iis ; and he mentions others which he did not visit, 'i'hc jieople whom he found there seem to have itceii luosliy Americans ; in one case a hu^hand and wile. The reporter finally took to hi.-, heel, wi'h an opium pipe as a trophy, and (U'd up th(,- street \v'ilh a (Jhinaiiiaii in pur.iuit. lie took refut'^(.' in the pcjlice station. The pipe was afterwards dis|)layed in the (jflice window of the Ni'''.'!, atul the reporter was threatened with prosecution h^r stealinj.; it. t Mr. (i.Tliomann, in a pamphlet puhlished in 1SS9, on the Proceed- ings at the .Second liilia national Temperance ("on^ress, held in I.SS7 at Zurich, stated that, according to tin; Iowa Ifeallh Hoard, there were more than io,(Xxj pi'i-ions in that State who used opium ; hut I have not been able lu verify the statement hy reference to any ollicial report. k i i I /i>n- I, 171 . trades, hut lie douhlc'd vvIicIIkt nftcr ;i year it would make iiiiK 1) din'erL-nrc. '■ A gcnllcinan residing' in Omaha told inc that he know several j)ersf)ns who had come over to that plare from ("oimcil ninffs on arconnt ol" the |)rohil)itory law; and 1 was informed, on what should he gof)d authority, that a number of wholi.'sale houses (1 think ten was the number mentioned) had quitted C'ouncil P.luffs and f^one to C)maha forlhesatne reason. These were the only definite statements which I heard bearinj^ on this ])oint. My informants in both cases attributed the migration not to any desire for a, better sui)|jly of ]i(|uor, but to dis^nist at the law, and the evasions and skulking whicli it led to, and a sense of its interference with personal liberty. The failure or imperfect success of prohibition in Iowa is generally ascribed by prohibitioiii ts to the default of the local officials who, tin)' maintain, < ould make it effective, if tlu.'y dispkiyed the requisite /,e;d in the (hschart^e of their ■'ulies. ( )ne i)r(»liibitionist. who as a pri\ate < iti/en had taken ; e. ^:ng ]).'ut in an attem])t to put down the dramshops in the town in which he lived, expressed to me his ( onfidence that if he were mayor he would S(K)n |)Ut a slop to the trade in that place, and that the general sentiment was strong enough in lavour of the law U) enable it to be successfully and con- tinuously enforcefl. Another, while equally sure that the authorities could and ought to enforce the law, admitted that to do so would require great and continued efforts; his experience has been that for a time sentiment runs very high, and great efforts are made ; tiien the pressure runs (hjwn. In answer to the suggestion that the authorities were not likely * Some ycnrs ago there was a stat^natimi of Iiusincss in Dcs Moines, and the growth of the town sefineri to sl'ip ; Iml laMoily l)Viililiii^ has j^one on nioi<; rapidly, and the city is growing in iin|iorlancaii', Isi.ANi) li;i.s iM.'idc three tri;ils of proliiMtioii, and three times has t^iveii it ii|>. 'I'he (irsl piohihilory law was pii.^sed in 1.S52 and continued till i-S^:;, when it was succeeded by a H( ensiti}^ measure. The sec(jnd proliihitory hiw had a short life -from 1^74 to 1.S75 -when 11 hcensing and local option law- look its jilace. In 1.S.S6, ;i prohibitory amendment l(j the Stale ConstiUiti(;n was submitted to the people, and adopted by 15,1 13 to 9,230 v(jtes — a maj(jrity (jf 5,le as a surprise. (Ireat activity was (\erled by the [>rohibiti(jnists ; women urged their husbands and brothers to vote for it ; many v(jted f(;r it who were not really prohibi- tionists, and who never exjiected that it w(;uld be carried. In Providence, it seems alnujst Irom the first to have been systematically violated ; and in the Slate generally it cannot be said to have been enlon :ed with much success. It is < laimed for it that, especially during the earlier portion of the pro hibilory jxrriod, drinking was diminished; and, und(nibtedly, arrests for drunkenness and f(;r crime in general showed a marked falling-off, as may be seen from the following figures which relate io Providence: — Sl.\ MONMIS, jiri.Y- DKCKMItKK. It ,5 (I ii,i;ii(.i;). i lo,;') ( l'ic)'ii!(iii()ii). Total aire sis (Joiuniori drunkards I)runkenncss J.J98 2,427 2,262 23 '423 i '7 1 .■l.\//:K/l .l.\ JjiJlOR /.AlfS, III Ncsv|)()rl, (luring the s.iinc jjcriods, nrrcsts for .ioii, and it is said thai by October many of the < lubs were in lull swini;. Six months later, the precaution of the use of |)rivate keys was no h^n^er lh(Mi.^ht necessary, and thenceforward the saloons were run practically open and imche\. \*^>^^.^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 '-IIIIIM IIM •^ 1^ III 2.2 ti^ 2.0 1-4 IIIIII.6 V] <^ /} '<5. A V '/ /^ i."^^'^ ^> ^^ ,v \\ ^<^ V c> ^^ ^"..>^ % ''q.^ 176 American Liquor Laws. proliibitory law. There was great and general failure in the conduct of prosecutions against law-breakers. A tribe of pro- fessional informers or "spotters" sprang into existence ; but their testimony soon grew to be so discredited that it was impossible to obtain convictions on it. Nine months after the law had gone into effect, the chief of the police in Providence declared that, since juries refused to credit "spotters," it was impossible to obtain evidence in sale cases ; it was hoped to reach better results by proceeding under the nuisance law.* In Newport County, it was said that prosecutions were carried through with more success, and the law was better enforced. The chief of police, however, at Newi)ort stated in Marcli, 1887, that much licpior was coming into the place; there were no open saloons, but most of the business was done in tenement houses, and club-rooms were said to be increasing. There, too, much discredit fell on "spotter" evidence. In South County two si)otters were prosecuted for perjury. In Ih-istol County, statements were (juoted of prohibitionists who admitted the failure of enforcement \ the law, in their view, was faulty, and the enactment of a power to raid at night without warrant was advocated ; the fact, however, that the saloon-keeper was outlawed was urged as being in itself a step in the right direction. In August, 1888, it was reported from Cedar Grove that li([uor was being sold in more than forty places of all kinds, including all the hotels but one — the existence of these places being well known to the police, who were said to be paid by them. In Pawtucket, early in 1889, the total number of known * The chief of the State pcjlice in his first report, made after prohibition had been in force about six months, stated that incjuiry among all classes of people had convinced him that a large majority were opposed to the further employment of detectives to secure evidence of the illegal sale of licpior. The experience of the preceding six months, in his opinion, proved con- clusively that reliance solely on this kind of evidence to secure convictions was unwise, though he had no reason to believe them untruthful. RiioDi: Island. 177 dramshops was stated to be 203 (143 saloons and stores, one- third being groceries; 52 kitchen bar-rooms; 7 hotels; and a club-room). The number, it was said, might be made larger; but doubtful cases were omitted.* Referring to official sources of information, 1 find that commitments to the State workhouse during the tirst six months of prohibition numbered 141, showing a decrease of 168 as compared with the corresponding months in the previous year, when 309 prisoners were so committed. In his first report, to which reference has already been made, the chief of the State police t complained of the apathy shown by friends of the prohibitory amendment in working for its enforcement. They seemed to feel, he said, that with its adop- tion their duties and responsibilities ceased. With the exception of the Women's Christian Temperance Union, to whose per- severing efforts the adoption of the amendment was largely due, and the Law and Order Leagues of two or three of the towns, he had received no words of encouragement, much less support, from the many kindred organisations throughout the State. In Bristol, which gave 418 votes for the prohibitory amend- ment, only fifteen electors at a special town meeting voted in favour of a proposal to appropriate funds for its enforcement. In Warren the same number voted in favour of a similar proposal, and in Gloucester it was by a unanimous vote indefinitely postponed. Two years later, in 1889, the chief of the State police reported that, having asked for information whether violations of the law had increased or decreased in number since the last « * The Providence Journal for February 13, 18S9, contained a map of the central portion of Pawtucket, showing places where liquor was sold. t The Act, which was passed to give effect to the prohibitory amend- ment, provided that the sheriffs of the several counties and their deputies, and the town sergeants, constables and chiefs of police, special cons-tables appointed under the Act, and deputy-chiefs of police of the several towns and cities should constitute a State police, having for their special duty the suppression of all liquor shops, gambling places, and houses of ill-fame. M ryS AMERicAh' Liquor Laws. preceding re[)ort, he had answers from 37 officers, of whom 22 reported a decrease, 6 (including the chiefs of pohce of Providence and Newport) an increase, and 9 reported no marked difference. Among those who reported a decrease was the Hon. WiUiam Sprague, chief of i)oHce at Narragansett Pier, and formerly (iovernor of Rhode Island and United States Senator ; the following extract from his statement indicates the views of one who a})pears to have favoured the existence of the prohibitory law, but not the attempt to give it a strict enforcement : — *' I am of opinion that, in proportion to the population, there has been less quantity of spirits consumed in this district the past current year than during previous years. Most, if not all, the sources of drunkenness have resulted through the sales of Iic[uor by the bottle from places inaccessible to the eye of the police, and not by the glass at the counter. The former practice may be likened to guerilla warfare that is evolved after regular warfare has been displaced. It has been the practice of the police here not to force the United States Government victualler and billiard table licensees — who contribute funds to promote the general peace, and who, if at all, publicly dispose of liquor and cigars in connection therewith — to close their establishments, as such evolves the organisation of a widespread guerilla licpior traffic, with no effective menace from police or regular operators. The true course to be pursued to secure the best results from the prohibitory amendment, is to discourage the keeping of liquor in private houses and its sale by the bottle — to encourage its public sale by the glass at the counter rather than through the guerilla liquor traffic mentioned. There should be no encouragement given for the repeal of the amendment. It is a menace, and as such a powerful regulator of the traffic, and if administered in a spirit of wisdom and sense, vvill favourably affect the general welfare. The pro- hibitory amendment in Rhode Island may be compared to the elective franchise accorded the late slave ; inoperative, but a powerful menace to the unbalanced mental structure The constant menace to the saloon that the prohibitory amendment effects, coupled with the penalty for its sale without a licence granted by the United States Government, as related to the Rhode Isr.Axn. 179 ^i ofuerilla liquor traffic, affords the best basis for its wise restraint and regulation ever inaus^airated." In his last report, made shortly before the repeal of the Constitutional amendment, the chief of the State i)olice observed that upon the Legislature must fiiU no small portion of the responsibility for the ineffectiveness of prohibition in some parts of the State. "Officers," he said, "who have long faithfully endeavoured to enforce the law in their precincts, imperfect and comparatively ineffective as it now stands, hoping that the repeated recommenda- tions of this department would become the law of the State, have in many instances become utterly disheartened and discouraged at the refusal on the ptirt of the Legislature to strengthen their hands by efficient weapons, while strengthening their opponents, by remedial legislation, and in not a few instances are unwilling to longer urge so unequal a contest. Upon a reconsideration of the recommenda- tions heretofore made by me in the way of additional legislation, I am more firmly convinced than before that they were wise, proper, and absolutely necessary, and I therefore now repeat the same, referring your honourable body to my report presented at the May Session, 1888, for a detailed account of the same and a Bill prepared by counsel at my request, embodying the same in the form of a proposed statute.* I am of the firm belief that an injunction Act should be passed, and at once, and that the same will prove the most effective weapon which the oflTcers of the law can wield, whether against the liquor dealers under the present law or against unlicensed liquor dealers, in the event of your honourable body concurring with the last Assembly in resubmitting the fifth amendment to a popular vote, its repeal by the people, and the subsequent enactment of a licence law." The insufficiency of the law was thus referred to and accounted for by Governor Davis in his Message to the (General Assembly at its January Session, 1888 : — "The chief of State police has been diligent in his office, and the law he was especially appointed to administer has been enforced as far as punitive influence within his control can effect it. That * The chief proposal was the enactment of an "injunction law" similar to that of Kansas [see p. 129). M 2 I So American Liquor Laws, the law is not more efficient — and it is sadly inefficient — is for want of a sufficient public sentiment to support it. It is a thankless task to attemj^t to enforce a law which has not the hearty moral support of the community to sustain it. Laws may represent pul)lic o]iinion, but their enforcement is dependent almost wholly upon the public will, as contradistinguished from public opinion ; and without a will the way will not be found. The prohibitory law, so-called, is written upon our Constitution and statutes, and self-respect as well as the obligations of our office demand that we do what we can to accomplish its purpose." A year later Governor Taft said : — "The operation of the laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors is, as yet, very far from being satisfactory. It is generally conceded that the advancement of the cause of temperance is desirable, but as to the best method to accomplish the result, the minds of citizens are widely at variance. On the one hand, it is urged that prohibition is a failure, and should give place to a high restrictive licence ; on the other, it is insisted that still severer measures should be adopted. Though the prohibitory amendment has beew in force two and one-half years, yet, until the advent to office of the present Attorney-General, the litigation arising under it has not been prosecuted with the zeal and energy necessary to demonstrate whether the system itself, properly administered, was effective or not ; and he has not yet been in office a sufficient length of time to push any considerable number of cases through the tedious processes of delay that the criminal code of this State unfortunately admits.'' Upon the subject referred to in the sentence last quoted, the following is the substance of a statement made to me on good authority : — The Republican party, under whose auspices the prohibitory amendment had been carried, adopted, as a plank in its platform at the State Elections of 1888, the principle of a strict enforcement of the law ; and the Attorney- General, then elected as a representadve of the party, was determined to fultil the party pledge both on that ground and on the general principle that it was his duty to act upon the law as it stood, and the duty of the people, if they did not 1 Rhode Island. I, Si approve of the enforccnient of the law, to get the law Uself repealed. The judicial system of Rhode Island makes it the duty of the pcjliee and local authorities to put the laws in force in the first instance ; but, if a case goes to the Grand Jury, whether on api)eal or because it is not triable summarily, it is brought under the control of the Attorney-Cieneral as prose- cuting officer ; and in this way a large number of lifjuor cases come under his cognisance. The Attorney-General has in this State very great power as regards the prosecution of crimes, being able to enter a nolle prosequi at any stage of the proceedings for any (jffence.* On the other hand, the forms ot [)roce(lure allow to the defendant great opportunities for delaying the course of justice. In the case of the liquor prosecutions undertaken in 1888 — 89, full advantage was taken of such opportunities; and every possible influence was brought to bear on the Attorney-General, both on behalf of the persons directly concerned and by members of his party, who foresaw political defeat as the result of too much zeal. Nevertheless, he proceeded on his way. By carefully scrutinising the jury lists, and challenging all those who were in the liquor trade, or in any way connected with it, or under its influence, he was able to secure convictions ; and, in spite of all dilatory pleas and obstruction, he fought and won his cases through all their stages to the point when nothing remained to be done but to bring up the offenders before the court which had tried them, to receive their sentence and go to prison. But at this point he found himself at the end of his year of oftice, when, under ordinary circumstances, he would have been re-elected for a second term. Instead of this, he was promptly turned out, being the only Republican candidate who failed to be elected ; and not one of the offending rum-sellers (a hundred or more of them) was ever sentenced. * I was informed that he could even stop a case after conviction for murder and before sentence. The only checks upon him are the annual election to the office, and the lial)ility to impeachment. i8: American Liquor Laws. This experience in Rhode Island exhibits a marked instance of the dependence of sucli a law as prohibition on popular feeling for its enforcement. In the first place, the police in cities and municipalities have to detect and proceed against offenders. 'I'he chief of i)olice is under the mayor; he will not proceed more actively than the general o[;inion— as represented by his official superior, the nmnicipal authority — desires. To do so would l)e to imperil, and [)robably lose, his re-appointment at the end of the year. Next, the Attorney-General — to whom these cases subsequently are brought — •willgenerall)' do no more than is required of him by the managers of his party. If, as in the present case, he undertakes to vindicate the law regardless of consequences, he will not be re-elected, and the law, unless a strong [)oi)ular impulse in its favour sets in, will soon cease to be vindicated. In Rhode Island the impulse — whether a fully poi)ular one, or a mere shifting of political pressure, to which the licjuor (juestion in this, as in many other States, seems to have been i)eculiarly subject — manifested itself in the other direction ; the tide had turned, and the prohibitory amendment to the Constitution was repealed by an over- whelming majority. i I The Licensing Law enacted in 1889 may be described as one of modified high-licence, together with local option in a double form. The licence fee varies from $400 in Providence, down to $200 in towns with less than 6,000 inhabitants ; but an objection by the owners or occupiers of the greater part of the land within two hundred feet of the premises [)roposed to be licensed, operates as a bar to the grant of a licence — a right of veto which is sometimes exercised. To this modified form of local option in individual cases, by veto of the immediate neighbours, is added the i)rinciple of the direct veto for every city and town by })opular vote, annually taken on the requisition of a certain number of citizens. Tiie i)rovisions of the law may be summarised as follows : — ! Rhode Isi.asd. 183 RHODE \^\.^.'^\^. —Special Session, July, 1S89, e. 816. An Act to regulate and restrain t/ic sale 0/ strong, malt, and spirituous liquors. Town Councils* and, in cities, Boards of Commissioners appointed by the mayor, may i,Mant or refuse to grant licences for the manufacture or sale of pure liquor to such citizens resident within the State as they think proper. Prior notice must be given, and remonstrants must have the opportunity of being heard. A licence may not be granted w here the owners or occupiers of the greater part of the land within two hundred feet object. The licensee has to give a bond of 81,000, witli two residents of the town or city as sureties, for compliance with the law and payment of all costs and damages incurred through violation of it. A local option vote is to be taken at each election of general officers, on a requisition of 15 per cent, (in cities, 10 per cent.) of the number of voters taking part in the last preceding general election. If the majority is against licences, none may be granted ; if it is the other way, " then licences under the provisoes of this Act shall be granted," until an adverse vote is taken. Except in the case of licensed taverns, a licence r,\ay not be granted for any place which is connected by interior cominimication with a dwelling-house, or " to which an entrance shall be allowed other than directly from a public travelled way." The licence-fees are : — For an off-licence to manufacture (covering sale at wholesale at manufactory) or to sell at wholesale and retail — not less than 8500 nor more than 81,000 ; for a licence to sell at retail only (less than two gallons) in the city of Providence, 8400 ; in all other cities and tow-ns, of over 15,000 inhabitants, 8350 ; in towns of from 6,000 to 15,000 inhabitants, •li'soo ; in all other towns, not more than 8300 nor less than 8200. The sale of liquor on Sundays, or to any minor or person of notoriously intemperate habits, or (for consumption or. the premises) to any woman, is prohibited. And a licensee is not authorised "to sell or ^""nish intoxicating liquors to any person on a pass-book or order on .1 store, or to recei\e from any person an}- goods, wares, merchandise, or provisions in exchange for liquors.' The punishment for illegal selling, or keeping for sale, is a fine * Town Councils have also the option of electing licence commissioners. 1 i84 Amkkica.y Liquor L.ui^s. of $20 a/i(i imprisonment for ten d.iys, with increasincj penalties after repeated convictions. In the case of a person holdin.i,^ a licence, it is forfeited and he is dis(|ualificd for five years, and the town or city is to brin.i;- suit for the amount of his bond. A licensee may also be summoned before the licensing- authority for permitting his place to become disorderly, "so as to annoy and disturl) the persons inhabiting or residing in the neighbourhood," or for permitting gambling or any violation of the laws of the State ; and, if it is made to appear to the satisfaction of the licensing authority that he has violated any of the i)rovisions of the Act, he is to lose his licence and be disc|ualified for fi\e )-ears. But for selling to a woman for consumption on the premises, or to a minor, the offender is to be fined ^5ioo (r/ui be imprisoned not less than ninety days nor more than a year, and be disqualified for five years; and one convicted as an illegal nianufacturer or "common seller," is to be fined 5?ioo and imprisoned for ninety days, which ])unishment is doubled on a subsequent conviction. Anyone forcibly evicting from his premises an intoxicated person to whom he has sold liquor is to be fined •'?2o, and be disqualified for a year. Penalties are also imposed for knowingly transporting liquor which has been, or is intended to be, illegally sold. Town Councils are to appoint special constables to enforce the liquor law ; it is also the special duty of sheriffs of counties and their deputies, and of the police of towns and cities, to use their utmost efforts to prevent crime by the suppression of un- licensed liquor shops, gambling places, and houses of ill-fame, and they arc also required to do so on recjuest of any taxpayer. A fine not exceeding -^500, with disqualification from re-appoint- ment, is enacted for neglect or refusal to perform these duties. The sheriff of each county is to appoint a deputy for the purpose of performing these duties. Provision is made for search and seizure on sworn complaint ; forfeited liquor to be destroyed. A licence is not required for the manuf^icture or sale of cider, or the manufacture of wine or malt liquor for domestic use, or of alcohol for exportation and sale out of the State, or manufacture or sale, by the gallon and upwards, of wine from fruit grown in the State. If injury is done to person or property by an intoxicated person, the same right of action lies against the person who furnished any of the liquor causing the intoxication, " if the same was fur- i I Rhode Island. 185 of ur- nished in violation of this chapter," as would lie against tlic person intoxicated ; and joint or separate actions may be brou,i;ht. For sellin;4 to a woman for on-consumption, or to a minor, or allowing a woman or minor to loiter on premises where li.juor is sold, the husband of the woman, or parent or guardia.i of the minor, may recover i?ioo in an action of debt, for each offence. Notice not to sell may be given by the liusl)and, wife, parent, child, gi -irdian, or employer of an hal)itual drunkard ; damages may be recovered for sale within twelve months after notice ; but, in the case of an employer, only if injured in person, business, or property. Pharmacists may sell without licence for medicinal purposes, on medical prescriptions or on the written order of the buyer. No action can be maintained for the value of licpior illegally sold, and all payments made for such iicpior arc held — as between the parties — to have been received in violation of law, without con- sideration and against equity and good conscience. All obstructions to the view must be removed on Sundays. The fact of the very imperfect enforcement of prohibition in Providence and some other parts of the State was, I believe, generally admitted by prohibitionists, and was attributed by them to the inadequacy of the law itself, and of the means taken to give effect to the law, such as it was. The opinion was confidently expressed to me by residents, that the condition of Providence as regards drinking has been better under the existing licence law than it was during, at least, the latter portion of the prohibitory period. A point, to which my attention was specially directed, was the extent to which the liquor traffic during that time was carried on in tenement houses, where it was almost impossible to detect it. The police can go into licensed premises at any time for the purpose of seeing whether the regulations are obeyed. Unlicensed places can only be entered with a search warrant. Even if a place of illicit sale was discovered, a warrant obtained, and a seizure made, more liquor would immediately be brought into the same place, and the sale would recommence and go on for some time before evidence was obtained on which a new search warrant would be issued. iSf) American Liquor Laws. One who liad been officially concerned in the duty ot enforcing the prohibito.y law informed me that, at first, there certainly was a diminution of drinking and drunkenness, followed, however, by a steady deterioration in this respect. The returns of arrests and convictions, he said, did not accurately retlect the real stale of the evil, because oi the greater difficulty of discovering what was going on, and the fact that the drunken did not ai)pear so much on the streets, where alone they can be arrested. Nevertheless, the returns indicated a considerable and pro !;ressive amount of illegal drinking during the [)rohil)itory perioc The following table shows the number of arrests in Providence and some other particulars res[)ecting that city : — Providence (population, 1S90, 132,146). Arrests, etc. Calendar Year. 1886.* 1887.* 5,151 18&8.* 1889.' 1890. 1891. All offences 5,930 6,446 6,590 6,900 C(jmmon drunkards ... 105 135 128 145 155 Drunkenness t 3,636 3.625 4,oc6 4,6'9t 4,898 5,064 Liijuor offences 305 103 74 81 100 i5«b^ Licjuor seizures 20 100 357 205 115 57 No. of police, all ranks 206 204 217 216 No. of licences : — Wholesale at JirSnO... . . . 33 Retail at i?400 592 Druggists at %<) ... ... 65 * I'rohibition was in force July, 1886, to June, 1S89. f Arrests for drunkenness in previous years were ; — 1881, 5,173 ; 1S82, 4,754; 1883,4,389; 1884,4,334; 1885,4,328. \ On the rejection of the prohibitory law, a short 'Period of "free rum" intervened before the licensing law was passed in August, 1889. The police report states that most of the increase in the arrests for drunkenness was accounted for by this intervening period. § Ninety arrests for selling liquor without licence, an increa.se of sixty over the previous year. i87 CHAP'l'KR XL !\I A S S A C H U S KTT S . (E.\-Prohil)ition. Hii^h- Licence. Numerical Limitation. l/ocal Oi)tioii.) TiiK Commonwealth of x\hissachusctts enacted a general pro- hibitory law ill 1855, ^vhich was re])ealed in 1868, and restored in 1869. Li 18; a "free beer" amendment was carried, which was rejected in 1873. '''he election of 1874 was decisive against i)rohibition, and in 1875 ^ licence law was enacted, which was supplemented in 1881 by a local ()[)tion measure. In 1882 a Bill for the restoration of prohibition was only defeated in the House of Representatives by the casting vote of the Si^eaker ; and in March, 1889, it was resolved by the general court that a proposed amendment to the Constitution prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors for use as a beverage be submitted to the people for ratification. The vote was taken in April, 1889, but the proposed amendment was defeated by about 131,000 votes to 85,000. The old prohibitory law being, at first, in many places, in- differendy executed, an independent State police was created in 1865 to suppress licjuor shops, gambling places, and houses of ill-fame. The feeling of opposition to the law, largely due, it is said, to the attempt to enforce it in Boston, led in 1867 to an inquiry into the whole question before a Joint Committee of the two Houses of the State Legislature, I'he committee held twenty-seven public sittings between the 1 9th of February and the 3rd of April ; witnesses were examined, and addresses were delivered by representatives of the several parties interested, and a thorough investigation was held. The speech of ex- Governor Andrews in particular was a powerfiil agent in bringing about a repeal of the prohibitory law. 1 88 American Liouor Laws. An examination of the report of this committee will indicate the considerations which led to this result, though the (juestion continued to be fought for some years longer, 'J'he committee reported that they found themselves con- fronted by three facts : — I. 71ie stre/ig/h and character of tJie opposition to the existin^s^ prohibitory laic. U])on this the committee say : — " Among the witnesses for the petitioners there were very many men whose character and opportunities for information gave peculiar weight to their testimony. Several of the former Governors of the State, a large majority of the municipal officers of our cities, [)resent and former judges, present and former district attorneys, eminent and noted ministers of the gospel of every denomination, city missionaries, a large body of our most distinguished medical men and chemists, sound and experienced business men, many total abstinence men (some of whom had advocated and been foremost in the enactment of the present law), with ■•" many others, coming from all parts of the State, and ' ' iv" at the cjuestion at issue from their various points of view- .estified in favour of a modifica- tion of the law. It is witho precedent in the history of the Legislature of this State, thac a criminal statute should be so numerously oi)posed by men of this class and character." II. That this opposition was increasing. " It is certainly a significant fact that the opposition to this law seems steadily to have increased. So long as the law was not enforced, there was comparatively little opposition to it. As soon as it is enforced, and the further that its principles are carried into execution, there spring up opponents on every side, not merely or chiefly those who are pecuniarily interested in the matter, but thousands of good citizens, who cannot be assumed to be controlled by any other motive than regard for the public good." III. TJic character of the legislation designed from time to time by the sUj porters of the law to carry it out more effectually. jii ^f ISS. \C!fUSF.TTS. 1S9 The ordinary methods of procedure suffice for the enforcement of the whole criminal code ; but for this particular law, the course taken by its supporters seems to indicate great distrust on their part of the ordinary methods. A special State police has been created ; the district attorneys have been tied down by special regulations depriving them in these cases of the discretion allowed to them in all other matters. " These strict enactments were designed to compel and have com [idled prosecuting officers to administer the law with a harshness not deemed necessary in the case of other laws." Altemj^jts have been made to alter the jury laws in the trial of these cases; and the Judges are not allowed the ordinary discretion in awarding punishments. These three facts, in the opinion of the committee, " tend to raise serious doubts as to whether the law is approved by the people ; and, if not approved by the people, whether it is a just and proper criminal law." Some witnesses expressed their belief that the use of any quantity of intoxicating liquor as a beverage is in all cases a sin; but this did not appear to be the view of the mass of the supporters of the law. Medical opinion was divided on the question whether such beverages were beneficial or injurious. The law did not prohibit the purchase or the use, but only the sale, of liquors. " If it is wrong to use liquors as beverages, why not punish those who use them ? If the law studiously neglects to punish the b'^yer and the user, is it not strong proof that, in the (pinion of those who framed it, the use is not wrong ? And if the use is not wrong, is there any sense or justice in punishing those who sell for the use?" Upon the argument that the general good requires all men to abstain from liquor because some will use it improi)erly, the committee maintained that it was beyond the legitimate scope of legislative action to attempt, by criminal enactment, to prevent the many from using these beverages because a few may abuse them. TQO American Liquor Laivs. As regards the practical results of the law, the committee were of opinion that, with a strong and vigilant State police, it might be ])Ossible to prosecute successfully most of those who openly violated the law, though, with pul)lic sentiment in most of the cities and very many of the towns sustaining those who sold, this was not always possible. But " the evidence before the committee, though, of course, to some extent conflicting, tended to show that in all those cities or towns where the prosecutions against open places had been the most active, an extraordinary number of such places was started, and that more liquor and worse liquor was drunk, and that more intoxication ensued." The following statistics were given : — Numl)cr of places in Boston in which liquor was known to be sold ... Nunil)er of arrests for drunkenness 1854. 1,500 6,983 i866. 1,515 15.542 In January and February, 1867, when the law was enforced with unprecedented vigour, a large further increase in the number of arrests appeared. The report was general from different parts of the State, that drunkenness and breaches of the law were very prevalent in the cities and large towns, while in the small towns* hardly any lic^uor was sold. The conmiittee called attention to the immoral business practices sanctioned by the prohibitory law, which allowed men to purchase licjuors on credit, and then repudiate- their debt, and to the fact that licpiors could not be attached in execution of a judgment, since the officer who seized them would be liable to prosecution for .selling them. * It must be recollected that, in Massachusetts, the word " town " includes not only those urban districts which have not risen to the rank of cities, but also all the rural districts. A/AssAc/n'sr.TTs, T91 In conclusion, the committee expressed their belief ''that the time had come when this prohibitory law— unsound in theory, inconsistent with the traditional rights and liberties of the people, tempting to fraud and protecting those who commit it, in many communities not enforced because of thorough disbelief in its principles, in other communities, when enforced, driving the liquor traffic into secret places, and so increasing rather than diminishing the amount of drunkenness and other crimes — should be so far modified as that the rights of the citizens will be respected, while, at the same time, the general peace and order of the community will be better promoted." The committee recommended that cider and beer containing less than 3 per cent, of alcohol might be sold without licence, and proposed in detail a licence law for other liquors. The report was signed by three members of the Senate and five members of the House. A minority report was also presented (signed by one senator and three members of the House), setting forth the evils of intemperance and the necessity of prohibition being maintained. The argument that the law could not be enforced was traversed, the opinion of the district attorney for Cumberland County being quoted in this sense. The existing Local Option Law of Massachusetts is peculiar in requiring a direct vote to be taken every year^ in every city and town,* on the question : " Shall licences be granted for the sale of intoxicating liquors in this city (or town) ? " Before licences can be granted, an affirmative vote must prevail ; in the event either of no vote being taken or of an eciuality of votes on either side, there would be no power to issue licences, and liciuor could not be legally sold. If the answer "yes" has the majority, api)lications for licences are made in March or April to the local municipal authority! (in Boston, to the and towns -the * Tlie whole State is divided into "cities former now (1893) numbering 30, and the latter 321. f In a city, the major and council may appoint a board of three Licence If); // vA'AVf. /.v L/oroK L.iiis. Board of Police), and the licences take effect on the ist of May. The licensing authority may refuse to issue a licence to a person whom they deem unfit to receive it ; " but nothing herein shall be so construed as to compel" the granting of licences.* The following classes of licences are issued at the following rates, the licence duties (except in the sixth class) having been increased under a recent statute : — Classes of Licence. To sell liquor of any kind, to be drunk on the premises... Beer, cider, and wine, O'H ... Beer and cider, 07i Liquor of any kind, ^ Beer, cider, and wine, ojf Apothecaries — for medicinal, mechanical, and chemical purposes only Fees. I. 2. 3- 4- 5. 6. Not less than $i,ooo. Not less than 8250. Ditto. Not less than .S300. Not less than $150. $1. The licence-fees now actually charged in Boston are as follows :— For Licences of the 1st Class, to sell all kinds of intoxicating liquors, to be drunk on the promises : — A. Innholders '^1,500 B. Innholders 1,200 Common Victuallers ... ... ... ... ... 1,000 For Licences of the 2nd and 3rd Class, to sell malt liquors, cider, and light wines, containing not more than 15 per cent, of alcohol, to be drunk on the premises :— Common Victuallers ... ... ... ... ... •'?5oo Commissioners to be the licensing authority. In 1892, a Bill was introduced in the Legislature for making such appointment compulsory, with a view to protecting the purity of municipal administration by removing from the aldermen the pressure of saloon interests. * In 1888, the Board of Aldermen of Haverhill refused to give any licences, although the vote of the city had been cast, by a small majority, in favour of licences. L^ Mass A chusetts. ^93 300 300 1,000 1,000 For Licences of the 4th Class, to sell all kinds of liquors, not to be drunk on the premises: — Grocers* 7 Wholesale Druggists A. Wholesale Dealers (only to be issued in con- junction with a first-class victualler licence) ... B. Wholesale Dealers For Licences of the 4th Class, to distillers _ For Licences of the 5lh Class, to sell malt li.iuors, cider, and light wmes, containing not more than 15 per cent, of alcohol, not to be drunk on the premises : — I^ottlers ^^QQ Brewers ,000 For Licences of the 6th Class, to druggists j Special Club Licence ... ... ... rg The following extract gives similar information for anotlier large town : — WORCESTER [JCENCE-FEES FIXED. [Special Dispatch to the Boston Ilerald.'l Worcester, March 27, 1893.— The Board of Aldermen to-night fixed the fees for liquor licences as follows :— Innholder, first class, !$i,40o ; common victuallers, first class, Si,4co; coimiion victuallers', second class, >!i,ioo; wholesalers, fourth class, .i>2,2oo ; brewers, fifth class, §1,000 ; grocers, wholesalers, bottlers, fifth class, 8500;' druggists, sixth class, %\. These are the same fees as were fixed two years ago. A petition, asking that first-class and fourth-class licences be granted to the same person, was tabled. By a law which was passed in 1888 and came into operation in 1889 (in which year also the licence duties were raised), the number of licences (exclusive of apothecaries') is limited to I per 1,000 of the population (in Boston, i in 500), with a special provision for summer resorts, where the number may be increased during the three months which constitute the season, f * A Bill to prohibit liquor-selling by grocers was brought forward in 1892 and 1893. t A proposal to repeal this law was in 1893 defeated in the House by 131 votes to 80. A Bill was also introduced proposing the adoption of a modified form of the Norwegian system. A commission has been appointed to investigate that system and to report in 1894. N 194 A.uF.R/CA.Y Liquor Laws. The immediate effect of these two laws (high-hccnce and limitation of number) will be seen from a comparison of the following ngures for the two years ending respectively April, 1889, and April, 1890 : — 1 . .' ,. I.;,, .. No. of Licences, Amount of Duty. >!l,286,305 6i6,94>J No. of ' Licences, j Amount of Duty. Massachusetls ... Boston 4.832 1,798 2,277 7 So : •-?i,Si2,8io )> 1892 (after repeal of bar elausc) 31,691 The increase, however, of arrests in 1892 is believed to be partly due to an alteration in the law respecting the punish- ment for drunkenness, to be noticed later. No sale is allowed on Sundays or public holidays or days of election (except to guests in hotels), nor between 1 1 p.m. and 6 a.m., nor to drunkards or minors. There has been much abuse of the law allowing Sunday selling to guests in hotels, but the Police Board issued a warning in 1889 that no person would be considered a guest who had not hired a room. vSome years ago sales to children were frequent ; and the early efforts of the Law and Order League were chiefly directed to checking this abuse. A place used for the illegal sale of liquor is a common nuisance and an injunction for its suppression may be obtained on the information of the district attorney, or on petition often voters. "Intoxicating liquor" is defined to include any beveiage containing more than i per cent, of alcohol. A common victualler's licence cannot be granted if the owner of any real estate within twenty-five feet objects, nor can any premises within four hundred feet of a school be licensed for ^;z- consumption. An attempt to extend this provision to buildings used for religious worship was defeated in 1892. The law further contains provision for the issue of search * The Bill was passed by the Senate and House and vetoed by the Governor. f The date at which licences expire. The police returns [see p. 221) are made up for the twelve months ending November 30. 1 AIassachusetts. 197 warrants, and for the seizure and analysis * of liquor, etc. The penalty for violation of the liquor law is hne from 8250 to i<^oo,(r/i(/ imprisonment from one to six months. A licence is also liable to be forfeited for violation of any .>f its conditions. In districts which vote no licence, all places used by clubs for the purjiose of selling, distributing or dispensing liquors to their members or others are deemed common nuisances. The "civil damage" clause provides that any one injured in person, property, or means of sup])ort, by an intoxicated person, or in consequence of his intoxication, has a right of action for damages against the person who supplied any liquor wholly or partly causing the intoxication. It has been held that :f the damages cannot be recovered from the licensee, his sureties may be sued upon their bond. The mayor, or (in towns) a selectman, or a relative may give notice respecting any drunkard to lic[uor-sellcrs not to sell to him. If the notice is not observed, the relative of the drunkard may sue the offenders for damages not less than ipears to be a general belief that, in the great majority of the country districts and in some, perhaps a majority, of the cities, a vote of " no licence " implies a condition of sentiment favourable to the enforcement of the law, and that in such cases it is generally enforced with vigour and, on the whole, with success — greater success than is likely to attend the enforcement of a general prohibitory law in a locality which does not distinctly favour it ; and it is claimed that the requirement of a local option vote annually has the double advantage of keeping public opinion directed upon the liquor question, and of aj^iplying the law of prohibition to just those places in which, for the time being, it is possible to enforce it. w Massac/wsj.tts. 301 In tlic more populous places, however, it is impossible entirely to j)rcvent the illicit trade being carried on in secret ; and, in some cases, it flourishes ([uite openly and without restraint. Advocates of prohibition have themselves expressed the opinion that it is better that " licence " should be voted in llcxston (though they would not themselves vote for it), on the ground that prohibition cannot as yet be there enforced. Illegal liciuor-selling by druggists seems also to be not uncommon in prohibitory districts, in many of which persons have entered the drug business apparently for the i)ur[)ose of selling intoxicating li(iuor (under the provision authorising such sale for medicinal, mechanical, and chemical purposes). In 189 r, nearly three times as nnny druggists' licences were granted as there were in 1884. This increase is the more remarkable seeing that more than 200 municipalities have discontinued granting any such licences. The following table gives some details of recent voting on the annual (question of licence or no licence. The vote, in towns, is taken in the early part of the year, and in cities in December. The licence year begins May i ; so that the vote in a town governs the year in which the volc is taken, while, in a city, it does not take effect till the following year. The return from which the figures in the table are taken is for the calendar year ; the table, therefore, does not show the state of affairs at any given moment, resulting from the votes cast in both cities and towns : — i Year ill Nuiiilier of cities and towns votin.ki on (luestion : "Shall licences be granted V" Number of votes cast. Auiiregat Of oil B population (appro.xiniatc). which vote taken. Yes. No. Yes >J" ies Of towns C1..0S. Towns. 69 61 43 Cities. Towns. 129,268 119,191 134,819 ,. ,. ,. 1 Vf)tini' \otniK^es. y^^/^ \'oting Yes. 230,000 174,000 \'otintf No.' 1890 1891 1892 18 16 12 10 12 18* 257 262 278 108,533 127,123 158,957 1,095,000 1,024,000 848,000 277,000 348,000 546,000 636,000 670,000 * Including two newly-created cities, Everett and Medford, 202 American Liquor Laus. Comparing ilie weight of the voting on this (jiicstion with the total nuniljer of registered voters and with tlie vote for (lovernor, we find tlie following result : — - 1891 1892 Registered voters. 399,000 448,500 'I'otal vole oil Local Option. Total vote fur Governor. 246,500 294,000 321,500 380,000 The lit^uor (juestion does not, therefore, on the whole, call out a very heavy vote, but the figures for the last th^ee years show a steady progress for " no licence," which, in 1892, had carried three-fifths in number of the cities, and two-fifths of the city population ; while in more than six-sevenths 01 the town.s, containing something less than four-fifths of the popula- tion outside the cities, no licences were issued. In both 1891 and 1892, an aggregate majority of voces was given for "no licence," and, in the latter year, more than one-half of the population of the State were committed to prohibition. If, however, individual places are taken, the progress is less uniform. The cities, in particular, show a somewhat remarkable tendency to and fro between licence and no licence.* Thus, in 1891, two cities changed from "no licence " to " licence," while four took the opposite course. In 1892, the same tendency was much more marked ; of the whole twenty-eight cities which voted as such in the i)revious year (the two newly- made cities being omitted), fourteen reversed the previous year's vote— five turning from "dry"' to "wet," and nine from "wet" to "dry." This would seem to show that in a large proportion, at least, of the urban communities local option, after a trial of eleven years, has by no means produced a settled * Four cities— Quincy (16,700), Newton (24,300), Maiden (23,000), and Somerville (40,000) — are tlislinguished for having consistently voted " No" from the beginning down to the present time. All are in the immediate neiglibourhood of Boston— ()iiincy, the moi^t distant, being within eight miles. In the latter place the law has been enforced with much vigour owing largely to the exertions of one citizen. 5 Massachusetts. 203 state of public opinion on the liciuor question. But it must be added that the voting turns, not infrecjuently, on a false issue, and is decided on some ground connected only in a secondary degree, or even not connected at all, with the simple cjuestion of the expediency of recognising or prohibiting the saloon. Sometimes, in places where there is no really preponderating prohibitory sentiment, it happens that, owing to public disgust occasioned by the discovery of gross jobbery or corruption in the granting of licences, a vote of " no licence" will be carried ; occasionally, the same result will be brought about by the action of disappointed candidates for licences, who are willing to revenge themselves on their more fortunate rivals, and perhaps think to improve their chances of carrying on a remunerative illicit '.rade. In such cases, the law will probably be to a great extent evaded — perhaps even be little else than a dead letter. The " no licence " vote of 1892 in Fall River was, as I was informed, attributable to internal dissensions in the Municipal Council, and it was not anticipated that any serious and sustained attempt would be made to enforce the law. In one place, I was even told that a local option vote had once turned on a dispute between two rival churches concerning the purchase of a plot of land. In 1 89 1, a great rally against lic^uor was made in J^oston — the vote on that side of the (juestion rising from 13,900 to 21,500, while the liquor vote fell from 29,100 to 25,600. In the following year this movement went still further, "licence" being carried only by 31,600 to nearly 30,500. Here, agam, we find an example of the question being determined on a side issue. i\ portion of the saloon vote had been cast at the election for Governor (November, 1892) in favour of the Republican candidate ;* accordingly, in the following month * It was alleged that one of the Police Commissioners (who are the licensing authority in I^oston), lieing a Republican an'l a politician, had made his influence felt among the liquor-sellers at the election. The f I 204 Am/-:k/can Liquor Laws. when the local option election was held, a number of Democratic votes, which, under ordinary circumstances, would have been cast for ''licence," fell on the opposite side by way of retaliation on the saloon-keepers for what was regarded as an act of apostacy. As examples of the tendency of individual i)laces to fluctuate backwards and forwards on the local option (Question, the following cases may be mentioned ; to add largely to them would probably be a mere question of labour in examining the returns for several years. The figures of arrests for drunkenness are taken from a newsj^aper* published in the anti-liquor in- terest, which gave them as showing the improved results obtained under "no licence" : — I'-ITCIIISURG (population in 1890, 22,000). Year. L ocal Option Vote Arrests for I )ruiikenness. (passed previous Dec). May to October. 18SS No licence. 181 1889 Licence. 253 1890 ]No licence. 128 189I Licence. 461 1892 No licence. 1 315 WORCESTER (population 84,600). 1880 No licence. 59^ 1887 Licence. i,57« 1890 No licence. 612 1891 Licence. 1,699 1892 No licence. 952 Republicans themselves denied this, and slated that the transfer of a certain number of liquor votes to their side was due to the non-partisa character of the police and licensing administration, which placed the liquor men in a more independent position and enabled them to throw oft" their subservience to the Democrats, both in the matter of votes and of contribu- tions to the Democratic campaign fund. In either case, it was agreed that the "no licence " vote cast by many Democrats at the local option election was an act of retaliation. * The Frozen Truth for December 9, 1892, published at Cambridge, Mass. 3f.4 SS. ! CII USE TTS. 205 ilAVKRHli.T, (population 27,400). f; 1890 1891 1892 No licence. Licence. No licence. 176 612 373 It should be pointed out that a 'Mio licence" vote, passed in December, takes effect only in May, current licences con- tinuing in force till the end of April. On the other hand, if in the following December the voting is reversed, though no licences can be given to take effect before May, still, in practice, the prohibition on the sale of liciuor will not be enforced after the adverse vote is taken. Conseciuently, in the ca.se supposed, "no licence" will have practical effect only from May to December— seven months— while, in the converse case, the sale of li(iuor will go on without interference for nearly a year and a half, i.e., from the moment when the vote for " licence ' was given to the May year following, when the licences expire. In Worcester and some other cities, it is admitted that the prohibitory law is not generally well enforced ; but friends of " no licence " claim that it does good even where the enforce- ment is very imperfect, and they point to the figures just given to support their view. On the other hand, it is said that some allowance should probably be made for a greater proportion of drunkenness which, in places where the open saloon is abolished, does not appear on the streets, and so swell the returns of arrests. Subject to such fluctuations, the larger cities, on the whole, generally vote for " licence "—the chief exception being Cambridge, with 70,000 inhabitants, which from 1887 onwards has steadily outlawed the saloon. The circumstances, however, of Cambridge are peculiar. It has a large resident population of persons connected with Harvard University, and it is close to Boston.* There is little doubt that both in this and in other * In Cambridge, it is said that "no licence" was first carried (December, 1886) through dissatisfaction with the municipal authority, 1 ! 206 American Liquor Laws. cities and towns in the immediate neighbourhood of Boston the vote for " no licence " is supported by many who are not proliibitionists, but are influenced by reasons of local con- venience and the facilities afforded by the adjoining city. In Cambridge, the law is sai . to be, on the whole, very well enforced, though a certain amount of liquor is illegally sold by druggists, and the discovery and punishment of breaches of the li([Uor law are sometimes attended with difficulties greater than are experienced in dealing with crimes of a different character. Thus, the chief of the police, in his report for 1889, complained that he had great difficulty in obtaining evidence in these cases, and that good citizens, who in other cases would render assistance, refused to testify. The following statistics for Cambridge are taken from the oilicial reports. The number of licences issued for several years before the first "no licence" vote was : 1 881, 155 ; 1882, 105; 1883, 200 ; 1884, 212 ; 1885, 314 ; 1886, 337 :— CAMBRIDGE (70,000). Year, ending November 30. 1886. 1S88. 1889. 1890. 1891. Tola! arrests 1,703 1,469 1,544 ^,ni 2,312 Drunkenness 720 ^53 722 900 Violation of liquor law 36 ... 50 146* Intoxicated persons assisted home 43 ... 12 ... 28 Search warrants issued ... 27 92 ... 142 I'aupers in City Almshouse 302 304 239 Lotlsrersf ... 1,078 534 70 Police force 76 79 ... «5 Cambridge is connected with Boston by two bridges ; and a large number of the arrests for drunkenness are made at the which was alleged to have used too little discrimination in the issue of licences, and, in particular, to have licensed certain premises in the immediate neighbourhood of an adjoining "no licence "place, for the benelit of persons coming from thence. * 99 convictions for illegal sale of liquor in 1891. f i.e., casual poor persons receiving a night's lodging. I ii a/ass. ICHrSE TTS. 207 I Cambridge ends of the bridges, as the revellers return from Boston. From the Report of the Prison Commissioners for 1892, it ai)pears that a large increase in the number of arrests for drunkenness took place in that year— the figures being, for the twelve months ending September 30, 1,515, as against 935 the previous year. The increase in 1892 Nvas general in the cities ; but in the towns there was a diminution. Tiie following statistics of a few other cities may be added : SAl.EM (30,S00). Voted "Ves" Deceml)cr, 1890. » 1891- „ 1892. "Yes "No' Total arrests Drunkenncsss Violation of li<[uor laws Intoxicated persons assisted home Liquor seizures ... ,, warrants issued, nothing found.. Lodgers ... Ve:ir endiii Lj Nov. 30. Year emling Sept. 30, i8y2. iSgo. 1891. ' 1,217 904 6 1,458 1,043 2 1,552 i,n9 20 8 iS 1,144 23 8 16 966 '™ Salem voted " no licence" in 1892, having for some years previously gone the other way. '1 he mayor in his annual address (1890) stated that the system of territorial limitation in the issue of licences {i.e., restricting them to a particular area in the town), in vogue for several years, was giving general satisfaction. The city marshal in 1890, referring in his report to the diminution of arrests for drunkenness (which were 240 less than in the previous year), remarked : " This, I think, is due in part to the fact that licences were gran'.ed in the town of Peabody last May." This illustrates a common and obvious result of local option, of which Boston and its surrounding cities present a more striking example. When Peabody allowed no saloons, the inhabitants of that place who wanted U(iuor came to Salem ; when saloons were opened again in Peabody, they F,.C;*"I1»«I 208 America X L/quor Laws. stayed at home, relieving Salem of an appreciable ([uantity of drunkenne':s. wo .CF.S Voted "No" „ "Yes" „ '*No" „ "Yes" PKR (84^655). December, 1889. ,, 1890. i* I89I. 1892. \ \'ear endiiiii Novenilier lo. Year end- ing Sept. 1887. 4,236 1888. 1889. 3,949 1890. 3,1" 1891. 4,060 30, i8y2. Total arrests 4,241 4,064 Common drunkard. ■ . . 27 42 . . . Drunkenness ... 2,954 2,894 2,827 Violatinj^ liquor law 233 104 79 163 Intoxicated persons sent home .. • 741 868 . . * Lodgers ... 5,097 5,146 ... Income from liquor licences ... . . • . . ■ •'§83,206 >! 1 20, 267 . . . Police force ... ... 94 .03 ... The city marshal, in his report for 1889, claimed that the diminution of the total arrests, and of the arrests for drimken- ness, proved the restriction on the number of licensed i)laces to have produced good results. GLOUCESTER (24,650). :)tec 1 "Yes" December, 1890. »> >) „ 1S91. »» >j M 1892. Year ending Nov. -^o. Year ending Sept. 30, 1890. 857 1S91. 1892. Total arrests ... 1,119 1,533 Drunkenness ... 488 671 1,123 Violation of liquor law 19 3 Intoxicated persons assisted home ... 103 98 Liquor seizures 38 44 ,, search warrants served 197 145 Income from liquor licences $23,902 $34,386 Ma SSA CI 1 1 'SE TTS. 209 titv of I In the four cities which have ahvays excluded the saloon since the first year of local option, the statistics of arrests for drunkenness in the last two years are as follows (taken from the report of the Prison Commisioners) : — Year ending Sept. 30. 1891 1892 RI; 172 252 Newton. 635 Quincy. 132 184 Somerville. 808 1,218 The figures in the following table of arrests for breaches of the liquor laws in Boston during the last few years are taken from the annual reports of the Board of Bolice : — Year miding November 30. No. of Arrests. Increase or Decrease per cei. . compared with preceding year. Percentage of foreign birth. 1888 1889 1890 189I 1892 568 838 684 612 534 + 47^ - 18 - io\ - 13 69 68 63 65 Much of the liciuor trade is in Irish hands, a fact which accounts for the high percentage shown in the fourth column of the table. The large increase of arrests in 1889 is doubdess due to the sudden reduction in the number of licences brought about by the new law which took effect in that year. The proposed constitutional amendment adopting prohibition was also defeated in 1889; and it has been suggested that this fact may have contributed to the increase of illicit trading, from an idea that public opinion was lax. The chairman of the Board of Police stated before a committee of the Legislature in January, 1892, that complaints of the manner in which the li(|uor dealers carried on tlieir business had continuously decreased since 1886. "Kitchen bar-rooms," he said (/.^., unlicensed "dives" where liquor is o i 2 lO American Liquor L.iirs. sold), " exist, and, I supi)ose, always will exist." * The following statement was furnished by him (as reported in the J^oston A'/onting News, February 6th, 1892), with the excej)- tion of the figures for 1892, wliich I have taken from the Report of the Board of Police for that year :— 1885. 1886. 1887. '5 Ni). of ccjinplaints for violation of condi- tions of licence, made either to board or in court t Licences forfeited „ (druggists) Licences in force (Nov. 30)+ _ ... Applications for licen- ces rejected... 332 65 2,677 391 108 2,059 1,068 196 57 5 1,929 701 197 44 5 1,789 514 1889. 1890. 104 29 10 45 3i 12 779 892 492 425 1891. ,1892. 26 I 6 895 287 42 I 3 896 229 * One kitchen bar-room is mentioned which the police had unusual difficulty in detecting. People were rcjjeatedly seen coming out drunk, but repeated visits were made by the police without success. At last a pipe was found and followed through three different houses round into another street, where six kegs of beer were discovered in a cellar connected with the pipe. The beer was drawn out of the common faucet in the sink, whence either beer or water could be drawn at will. In another case» after a long and fruitless search, a recess containing liijuor was found behind a picture hanging on the wall. Sometimes when an officer enters and calls for drink, if any suspicion is felt, he will be served with beer which turns out to contain less than l per cent, of alcohol. It is said that at the present time beer is no longer sold in the kitchen bar-rooms ; only hard liquor is kept in small quantities on the person (the stock being kept in another house), so that all search of the premises is useless ; and the vendor will only sell to people whom he knows, 'j'here is another class of illicit dealers who take in lodgers, to whom the liquor ostensibly belongs for their private use ; and if a seizure is made, the liquor is claimed by them. I have found some trace of this kind of evasion in Pittsburg (Pennsylvania), where beer would be served by the keeper of the lodging-house to the boarders, ostensibly without price, as part of their regular board. t The Police Board, as well as the law courts, have the judicial power of cancelling licences for breach of the conditions printed on them. X The figures include all but druggists' and special club licences. M.\ssAci/us/://s. 21 I in the excc])- l\cport 42 I It sct'ins to be less ccilain that lo -al 0[)lion iias hirgely decreased the whole amount of drinkini; and of drunkenness throughout the State tlian that it lias had this elVect in the [)ro- hibitory portions of it. It certainly is thought by some, whose oj)i)ortunities for observation give weight to their opinion, that while the law has on the whole increased the number of teetotallers, it has also tended to some extent to increase the drinking of those who drink, and that there is now a greater consumption of linuur and more drunkenness than existed before 1875. It is impossible to supply any con- clusive evidence in proof or disjiroof of this opinion ; but, if its correctness could be established, the fact would be the more remarkable since it is admitted that in places voting "no licence" the law is generally better enforced than the State i)rohibitory law used to be. According to the Brewer's Handbook, the consumption of beer in Massachusetts was 1,017,191 barrels in 1888 — 89, and 953,467 barrels in 1889 — 90) ^ falling off of more than 69,000 barrels in the year following the introduction of high-licence. It is argued by the advocates of the new law that the Hand- book would not be likely to over-estimate the shrinkage in the trade, and that it is safe to infer a still greater decrease in the consumption of s[)irits. The (juestion of drunkenness in Massachusetts has to be considered in connection with a recent change in the law respecting the [)unishment for that (jffence. Under the old law drunkenness was [)unishable by a fine of $5, and, f(jr a third offence, imprisonment; but since, in order to obtain a conviction for a third offence, the i)revious convictions had to be alleged in the complaint and proved at the trial, j)roceed- ings were rarely taken on the more serious charge. In 1891 the pecuniary penalty was abolished at the instance of the Massachusetts Prison Association, who argued that the State They incliule "off" as well as "on" licences, and also brewers' and distillers' licences. In 1892 the whole number of "on" licences was 680. O 2 212 American Liquor Laws. had no moral right to increase its revenue by fines, unless it was i)roved that they were of some use in diminishing crime; that the fine for drunkenness did not in fact deter men from becoming drunk ; that the system of imposing a $5 fine in every case led to a mechanical administration of the law undesirable in the interests of the i)ublic at large, and of the drunkard himself, and in particular unjust in very many cases to his family, who really [)aid the fine and bore the punishment — being deprived of money which they could not afford to lose, while the offender himself suffered little, and was not deterred from repeating his offence. If the fine was not paid, he went to i)rison for thirty days ; and a man has been known to spend in a single year eleven months in prison as the result of eleven convictions within the year for drunken- ness. Another case was mentioned of a man who had been committed to jail 140 times for that offence.* The fine, morever (it was argued), tended to pauperise the drunkard's family, and was therefore burdensome to the State, as well as unjust to the relatives. These considerations induced the Legislature to abolish the fine, and in .substitution for it the power was given to sentence the drunkard to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding twelve months,! or to be com- mitted to a reformatory, with the proviso, however, that if he satisfied the court that he had not been twice previously convicted for drunkenness within twelve months, his case might be "placed on file," />., practically dismissed. | The * Out of 25,000 committals to prison for drunkenness in 1890,23,000 were for non-payment of lines. It is stated that in 1889 nearly 7,000 persons ill Massachusetts went to prison for drunkenness who had l)een so com- mitted from three to fifteen times each, and nearly 1,000 who had been committed from sixteen to one hundred times each. f The absence of a minimum limit to the imprisonment was due (I was informed) to the representation of a Judge who urged that in some cases of drunkenness imprisonment for a very few days was a good deterrent. Minimum punishments are common in American statutes, less discretion in this respect being allowed the Judges than is usual in England. t Some confusion seems to have arisen at first from an idea that it was M.issAC//rs/:/Ts, 2r3 II less it crime ; •n from 'ine in le law ind of manj/ e the d not e, and e was in has prison inken- 1 been 3 fine, ikard's ^ell as :d the it the isoned com- if he iously case The 23,000 arsons coni- been r was cases rent, etion was new law further provides that if a person arrested for (hunken- ness states in writing that he has not been previously convicted of drunkenness within twelve months, and the officer in charge of the lock-uj) is satisfied that the statement is probably true, he may release the i)risoner pending investigation by the " [)robation officer." If, however, he does not exercise the power of release, and the statements are found to be true, the prisoner may be released by order of the Judge without being actually brought into court. If the officer exercises his j)ower of release, and the statement proves to be untrue, it is liis duty to proceed against the offender. Such arc the main provisions of this Act, which also provides for a record being kept of all cases. The release by the police of men arrested for drunkenness on recovering from their intoxication, without being brought into court, was a practice which to some extent had previously existed, and it is said that about two thousand persons were released in this way in 1890, but the practice first received legal sanction in the law of 1891.* The objects of the new law are thus stated in the report of the second annual meeting of the Massachusetts Prison Association : — " Its main purpose is to secure to each person arrested an intelligent and just judgment of his case. If he is one who offends infiequently, and is at other times law-abiding and at work, its purpose is, when he Ijecomes sober, to release him out of court and to lot him return to his home and work without the degradation of pul:)lic exposure in the criminal dock. If he is a frcc|uent or haljitual offender, the law permits the court to impose such length of imprisonment as will protect the community from the danger of his degrading habit and give him the chance of reform, if reform is possible. To make this distinction possible, the courts are given not competent for the court to commit on the first or second offence, but it was afterwards well established that this was at tiie discretion of the court. The point was indeed expressly decided in December, 1892, by the Supreme Court in the case of Commonwealth v. Morrissey. * A police officer releasing a prisoner in this way, prior to the passing of the new law, ran some risk of an action for false imprisonment. f 214 AAfKKlC.LV LliJUOK LaIVS. ) , by the new law records and officers whose duty it is to investigate tlie cases, and report the facts on wliirli intellij^x'nt judj^nicnls ran be based. The power of release oiii of court is placed, subject to certain checks and conditions, in the hanils of the officer in chaf.ue of the places of custody. The law was carefully worded to make the power permissive and not mandatory, it beinj^ expressly intended to throw on the arn^sted m.m the burden of satisfyinj; the ofticer that he was an infre(|uent offender, a decent law-abiding person, and so a proper subject for release." Ill other words, the object is to discriminate between a man who is drimk and a man who is a drunkard.* 'I'he "])rol)ation officers " already referred to are an in- stitution now forming an integral part of the judicial system of Massachusetts ; and are a link between philantbro])ical and charitable work on the one hand, and the administration of the criminal law and i)()]i( e on the other. The germ of this institution is traceable to a benevolent shoemaker of IJoston, named John Augustus, who from his frequent attendance in the municijial courts, and his interest in the prisoners brought up for trial, came to be recognised by the magistrates as a very useful, though an infornial, assistant in the administration of justice ; so that, wlien be a[)pealed for the release of a prisoner, and undertook some responsibility for his future conduct, the case would frecjuently be " placed on fde," that is to say, the man would be let go, and as long as he behaved himself would hear nothing more of the charge. After the death of John Augustus, the same work was taken up by * AVhile uu the subject, of the punishment of drunkenness I may mention that in a supplement to the Report of 1S8S of die Minnesota State Board tjf Corrections and Charities, there is a special report by Rev. M. M'G. Dana, D.D., on the English prisons, in which, spf\aking of the inconvenience and uselessness of repeated sentences of a few days, lie quotes Mr. Ilorsley (the prison chaplain} as telling him that drunken women will ask, 'What is the use of giving me a month? It will only he the same thing over again. It is cruel to be always letting me out only that I may return. AVliy can't the magistrate give me time in prison to get straight, or why can't the Government or somebody keep me here till I an\ cured?" M.\SSACffUSF.TTS. 215 •estigato 'Ills (Tin Imcci to fliat^c '> niake iteiidccl olticer »LM-.s(»n, •''('11 ;| ;in iti- >ystcni il and ion (){ )/" fhi.s ostoii, ice in ought I very on of of a uture lat is aved the . by may -.sot a Rev. the he lroi)erly do (at all events, in large cities), and takes him away from his other duties ; and that, the work of investigation and identifi(\ation being imi)erfect, offenders arc- let go who ought to be held. Some of the advocates of the new law recom- mended the ai)i)ointment of si)e( the work of prol)ation officers throughout the State in that year. The following extract from the rei)ort shows that the system has i it been brought into full oj)eration everywhere : — " 'Ihc tables show that nearly all tlic persons whose cases were put on probation were charged with drunkenness ; in some of the coiiits, no other offence seems to b(,' considered as a proper subject fur siu h disposition. In one court, where there is a large anu)\uU of business transacted, only one case of any kind was put on proba- tion in the year; and in one of the district courts in IMynionth ("ounty, noiie was put on probation the judge pla( in;; on file the cases that he did not desire to sentence, instead of putting the (lef(;ndants in care of the probation officer." The whole ninnber of persons placed on piobation in tin; State during the year ending Sep>teinber 30, 1S92, was 5. 200, of whom the great majority 3,750- had been brought up for drunkenness. * A report of tlie evidence presented to the cominittce in fav()\ir of tlie new law is printed in a jianiphlet entitled " 'I'lie i'unisliiiieii! of I )i iiiiKtai- ness. Reiiionslranee of the Massachusetts I'rison Associati(jn against the Repeal of the Law of 1S91." 2t8 American Liquor Laws. 1 v The rcfonnatories of Massachusetts have been founded on the model of tlie I'^hnira Reformatory in New York State Tile principle on which they are conducted is that of teaching tlic prisoners self-control by a minute system of rules governing their conduct in everything they do from morning to night, and by making tlieir early release dependent on an exact obedience to the rules. An offender sent to a reformatory is liable to be kept, according to the nature of his offence, for two or five years ; but it is possible for him, by good behaviour, to obtain his discharge in eight or eleven months. Ou his admission, he is placed in wiiat is called the second grade. He is instructed in the rules which govern everything he docs, and is warned that he can only rise to tlie first grade by a strict compliance with them ; while misconduct will be followed by a descent into the third grade, involving the wearing of a scarlet suit, exclusion from all recreations and amusements, and other penalties. After five months of unvarying good conduct in the second grade, the ^jrisoner is promoted to the first grade, in which the regulations are less irksome, and from which, if not degraded for misconduct, he is discharged at the earliest date allowed by the law. The system is said by its supporters to produce good results, many even of those who begin by showing themselves refractory, and are put into the third grade, being soon led to see that self-control is self-interest, and learning, in their struggle for promotion and release, habits which they had never previously formed, and which, once learnt, keep many of them out of i)rison for the future. In addition to the prison and the reformatory, there is still another destination to which a certain class of drunkards may be sent. The law allows the committal of anyone who is subject to di[)somania or habitual drunkenness, if not otherwise a bad character, to a lunatic hospital^ subject to the ordinary laws respecting lunatics. Such a person is not to be discharged unless it appears that he is cured, or that his confinement is no longer necessary for the public safety or his own welfare. In Mass, ichusetts. 219 -d on ^tate rning tlic year ending September 30, 1891, the number admitted to these institutions as habitual drunkards was 167 ; while 143 patients belonging to this class were discharged, of whom 60 were reported as recovered, 38 much improved, 21 improved, 6 not improved, and 18 not insane.* The inconvenience, how- ever, of treating these cases in common with general cases of lunacy is such that, in 1889, an Act was passed for the establishment of a State hospital for dipsomaniacs and in- ebriates, to which such persons might be committed for two years. In 1892, this new hosi)ital was not com[)leted.t Turning to the statistics of drunkenness and testing by them the effects of the law of 1891, we find, from the Report of the Prison Commissioners for that year, that the passing of this law was immediately followed by a large increase of arrests for assault, for disturbing the peace, and for being idle and dis- orderly, the probable explanation of which increase was, in the 0[)inion of the commissioners, that the police, who formerly arrested every man whose intoxication was in the least degree offensive and made against him a complaint for drunkenness, now preferred some other charge. The statistics also show a considerable (though less marked) increase in the number of arrests for drunkenness in 189 1, and a large increase in Boston in 1892, which is partly, perhaps, attributable to a greater disposition on the part of the police to arrest the merely drunk than under the old law when they were liable to a tine, and when the constable knew that he would have the trouble of appearing in court the next morning to prosecute the case. It seems certain also that, for a time at all events, an actual increase of drunkenness resulted from the itlea which prevailed among the police and, to a certain extent, among the judicial authorities, as well as the i)ublic, that there was to l)e no punishment until * In addition to these cases, 230 patients were adiniucd during the year wlujse insanity was attributed to intemperance. t On a sul)se(juent visit to Boston in March, 1S93, ^ found tliat this institution had l^een opened. 220 AAfERicAX Liquor Laws. the third offence. As already noted, the error of this idea has been authoritatively laid down by the Supreme Court. The repeal of the law i)rohibiting the sale of liquor at bars also took effect in 1891, and cau.sed an increase of drinking. As regards prison statistics, the number of commitments was found to fall off; but the prison population increased, owing to the sentences being generally longer than the thirty days for which prisoners were committed under the old law for non-payment of the fine.* Moreover, if the comparison is made between the numbers sentenced to definite terms of imprisonment, exclusive of those who (under the old law) went to prison merely because they were too poor to pay the fine, it will be seen that more than four times as many persons throughout the State were committed for drunkenness in 1892 as in 1890, viz. : — Year ending September 30, 1890 ., .. ., 1892 2,116 8,634 ^% Of the latter number, 6,253 ^""^-d sentences of less than six months, and 2,381 of six months or more — the latter including more than 400 sentenced for a year, and 186 sent to the reform- atory on indeterminate sentences, under which they were liable to detention up to two years. In short, the new law, it is claimed, fills the prisons with habitual drunkards for long terms ; the old law let most of them escape, and filled their places with occasional offenders who were imprisoned because of their poverty. From inquiries made in several towns, covering 17,500 cases of arrest for drunkenness since the new J * The Twenty-second Annual Report of the Commissioners of Prisons gives the following figures : — ! 1888. 1889. 34.094 5,860 1890. 33.290 5.798 1891. 27.795 5.548 1892. Year's commitments to all prisons 30,683 Average prison population 5,508 17,861 6,406 2 ' '■^-~ - - ATassachusetts. 221 le law has been in operation, it was found that less than 12 per cent, of the whole were arrested a second time, and less than 5 per cent, of the whole a third time, during the year.* The increased number of arrests in Boston for drunkenness in 892, as compared with 1891 (.y^a)elow), is certainly startling. 'IMie increased percentage of non-residents would account for a fraction only of the increase. The following figures show the total number of arrests m the whole State for drunkenness in several years, ending respectively on the 30th September : — 1885 1889 1890 1891 1892 The following table gives 35<48o '.3,158 52,814 56,512 70,682 particulars respecting arrests for drunkenness in the city of Boston : — Year ending November 30. 1885 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 ' Number of arrests. Increase or decrease 1 percentage per cent, compared ^^^^ resident, with preceding year. 16,780 23,044 24,991 23,970 27,396 33,698 -4- 8| 4i Percentage of foreign birth. + I4T + 23 . . « 39 54 37 53 39 52 41 53 ARRESTS IN liOSTv)N FOR ALL OFFENCES. Year ending November 30. 1889 1890 189I 1892 Number of arrests. 40,066 37,492 41,132 48,463 Percentage non- resident. 31 31 32 32 Percentage of foreign birth. 49 48 48 49 * Tl.c above figures are from a printed statement furnished to me by the Secretary of the xMassachusetts Prison Association, and are declared to be official. 222 American Liquor L.m's. 'iW 1, t The increase in the number of arrests for (h-unkenness in 1889 is partly due to the introduction, in the earl\- i)art oi that year, of the " [)olice-signal and patrol-waggon system," enabling an officer, on making an arrest, to send for the waggon to take away his prisoner, without obliging him to leave his beat. 'I he diminution in the number of arrests in i8yo is ascribed to li.e check [)laced in that year on the sale of li(|uor at bars, and, partly, to the discontinuance of the payment to the i)olice fund of part of the fees for prosecutions instituted by the police. I'iie circumstances of the increase in 1891 and 1892 have already been mentioned, with reference to the operation of the new " drunk law." The high percentage of non-residents shown in the table of arrests for drunkenness in J^oston is remarkable, and throws light on the question of the effects of local option in the case of a large city issuing licences and surrounded by districts which vote " no licence." In 1890 the i)opulation of the twenty-five cities of Massa- chusetts was 1,327,164; that of the towns was 911,779. Of the 52,814 arrests for drunkenness in that year, 45,982, or 87 per cent., were made in the cities. The arrests for all offences in the same year throughout the State numbered 80,844 (more than 65 per cent, being for drunkenness). The })roportion of drunkenness to other offences was higher in the cities than in the towns. The total number of persons sentenced to im[)ris()nment in lioston in 1890 was 33,290, of whom 77 per cent, were sentenced on conviction for drunkenness. In 1879 the number committed was 17,062, of whom 10,930, or 64 per cent., were for drunkenness. It must be remembered that the number of persons who are arrested for drunkenness is always but a fraction of those who are found intoxicated in the streets. In this State, however, it is probable that the police are quite exceptionally prompt in arresting offenders. ¥ i' i Massacjwsetts. 22 The prohibition movement, as tested by the vote cast for prohibitionist Candidates at recent elections, appears rather to be losing than gaining ground in Massachusetts. At Presiden- tial elections the vote in this State was 10,000 in 1884 ; 8,700 in 1888 ; and 7,500 in 1892. At the elections for Governor the figures were as follows : — Year. X'dIl's cast for Prt)- hibilioiiist Candidate, 1885 1886 1887 1888 (year of Presidential election) ... 1889 (vole on prohibitory amendment to the Con- stitution taken this year) 1890 (381,000 registered voters) 1891 1892 (year of Presidential election) ... 4,714 8,251 10,945 9,374 15,108 13,554 8,968 7,067 These figures may probably be taken as to some extent indicative of the growth or diminution year by year of pro- hibitionist sentiment; but they do not represent the actual numerical strength of those who favour prohibition, since a great number of these, indeed a large majority of them, vote on all political issues as Republicans, while some are even to be found in the Democratic ranks. The difterence of opinion between the " third party '' prohibitionists and those who vote the Republican ticket is sometimes very acute and even bitter ; the one side alleging that the Republicans are but lukewarm supporters of the cause, and that no further advance is to be expected from them ; the other side pointing to the restrictive liquor legislation already gained through the Republican party, and urging that to desert that party is to ensure the success of the Democrats, the friends of the saloon. The whole strength of prohibition in a State is called out only when the (juestion of an amendment to the Constitution, affirming the illegality of the liquor traftic, is submitted to the 224 American Liquor Laws. electors. Even then a certain deduction ought to be made for those who, while in favour of prohibitory legislation, dis- approve the a(lo})tion into the Constitution, as a fundamental princii)le of government, of a law on wliich so nmc.h difference of opinion exists among educated men. The proportion of voters, however, who are moved by this consideration is probably small. It has been already stated that the consti- tutional question was put before the voters of Massachusetts in 1889, when tlic proposal was defeated by a large majority, al)Out 131,000 to 85,000. Since then comparatively little active work has l)een done in the interest of State prohibition, and there seems to be at the i)resent time a general ac(|uies- cence in the Local Option Law. While it is impossible to fore- see how soon prohibitory activity may again exert itself, there appears to be no reason to think that the principle of pro- hibition is on the whole making any advance in this State \ and, in the opinion of many who are well qualified to judge, it is losing ground. The supporters of local, as distinguished from State, pro- hibition are far more numerous. A comparison of the aggregate vote for " no licence " with the vote cast in 1889 ii'i favour of the proposed constitutional amendment shows that those who favour the local suppression of the liquor traffic greatly outnumber the advocates of State prohibition. Cambridge, which voted for " no licence " in December, 1888, by a majority of 600, voted against the amendment by a majority of 2,600. Newton, which carried "no licence" by 1,210 votes, gave a majority of 50 against the amendment. In the smaller cities the constitutional amendment received a comparatively large amount of support. Nevertheless, all the cities except Sonierville had majorities against it, and all the counties but four. The country districts supported it by a less overwhelming majority than might have been expected from their strong " no licence " tendency. 225 CHAITER XII. 1' E N N S Y L V A N I A . (High-licence. Limitation of number.) The Brooks Law, passed in 1887, which regulates the Hqiior traffic in Pennsylvania, gives a wide discretionary power to the licensing authorities to refuse applications for licences; but there is no form of local option by pojjular vote ; nor is any statutory limitation placed on the number of saloons. The principle of local option has met with little success in this State. A law enacted in 1846, embodying this princii)le, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. A simi- lar law, however, was passed for a single ward in Philadelphia in 187 1, and after much litigation was declared constitutional, the former case being thus over-ruled. 'J^hereupon a general law was enacted in 1872 giving an option to each county; and at the election in 1873 """^''■^' than two-thirds of the counties voted for prohibition. It is said that the law was actively enforced ; but it aroused so much opposition, and so much pressure against it was brought to bear on both political parties, that, despite all efforts to the contrary, it was repealed in 1875.* The anti-li(iuor agitation was afterwards directed to the attempt to secure State prohibition. In 1889 a general vote on the (juesiion of a prohibitory amendment to the State Constitution was taken, when the proposed amendment was defeated by a very heavy majority. t * 111 the Session of 1893 a now Local Option T.ill was brought forward, and obtained a majority in the House on the second reading ; but it did not become law. It provided for a vole being taken regularly in February of every third year on the question, " Lor licence," or "Against licence." The vote was to be taken separately U>r each city, and for each county, exclusive of cities. t Vvr the amendment, 294,617 ; against, 4^4,644 ; niajority against, 190,027. P I 2 26 ^7.1/ /•; A' / c. I X L IQ I ■( > A" F.A\ vs. Trior to the passing of the IJrooks Law, much dissatisfac- tion was felt ill rhila(leli)hia, owing to the excessive number of saloons and the want of any legal means of sui)[)ressing a portion of them. In 1886 there were 6,059 li<-tnsed places in the city, or about 1 to 150 or 160 inhabitants; and not only was the total number out of proportion to any reasonable estim.ite of what was needed, but there was no way by which the prei)onderating sentiment of the inhabitants of any par- ticular street or district could effectually express itself in favour of the closing of a saloon whicli was deemed an annoyance to tb.e neighbourhood. Any citizen who paid the licence fee of i^^o was entitled to his licence, in the absence of proof of misconduct or bad character. In this respect the law of rhiladel[)hia differed from that which governed the rest of the State, where some degree of discrimination was exer- cised in the issue of licences. The prime object of those who drafted the lirooks Law was to reduce the number of saloons in Philadel[)hia by constituting a judicial licensing authority with the fullest power to refuse all applications which it was deemed undesirable to grant, and to lacilitate the intervention of public opinion in suj)i)ort of this restrictive power. The new law also raised the licence fees ; but those who originated the measure regarded " high-licence " only as a secondary element in the reform which they advocated. Another evil which it was desired to suppress was the pre- valence of what are known in England as "tied houses," and provisions were inserted in the Act for that purpose. The following is a brief summary of the law : — Retail licences may be granted annually in each county by the Court of Quarter Sessions to citizens of temperate habits and good moral character. An application for a licence must be refused whenever in the opinion of the court, having due regard to the number and character of the petitioners for and against the appli- cation, the licence is not necessary for the accommodation of the public and the entertainment of strangers or travellers, or that the I v«? Pennsylvania. 227 111- a applicant is not a fit person. The applicant inust be the only j)eison pecuniarily interested in the business proposed to be licensed, and must not have an interest in the profits of any other liquor-dealin;^^ business in the same county; and his application must be supported l)y a ccrtiticate from twelve electors of the ward, borough, or township. If the licence is granted, the licensee is required to enter into a bond in the sum of ."#2,030, with two sureties who must be freeholders '>f the same county, and must not be engaged in the manufacture of intoxicating lit[uor.* No licence may authorise the sale of liquor in a grocery store. The licence fees are fixed as follows : — In a city of the First Class (/.£-•., I'hiladclphia) ... !ij!i,ooo In a city of the Second Class [i.c, I'ittslnirg) In a city of the Thirtl Class In other cities In boroughs In townships 1,000 500 300 75 In cities sij^ioo, and in boroughs and townships one-fifth, of the licence fee goes to the county. The State takes no share. Tlurc is a separate scale of fees for wholesale dealers. The police are required under heavy penalties to make rcti;rns to every Court of Ouarter Sessions of all i)laces where liquor is kept for sale or sold, whether licensed or unlicensed; and they are to make monthly visits to such places. No debt incurred for liquor bought on credit by retail can be recovered at law. The punishment for selling liquor by retail without a licence is fine from .i?5oo to !j5,ooo, and imprisonment from three to twelve months ; for breach of the licence laws by a licensed dealer, line from ifiioo to !i?5oo ; on second offence, !?3oo to ijfijOoo ; and on third offence, %yx> to •'ii'jjOoo, or imprisonment from three to twelve months, or both. And the court is required to revoke a licence for breach of any of the liquor laws. Liquor may not be sold on an election day or on Sunday, 01 to * The Act originally required the sureties to be freeholders oi die sa ne ward or township, but this requirement was relaxed hy a suhsecju.nt enactment. Another clause, directed against "lied houses," prohibited any person from acting as surety for more than one licensee ; but this was struck out of the Bill. P 2 28 / . 1 / /•; A" ic. I x /./(^u '( uc A, in s. a irinor or person of known intemperate habits, or to a person \ ibibly alfected by drink, or to any j^erson on a |)ass-book or onlcr on a store ; penally, fine •i!!5o to .":55oo, (i/i(^ imprisonment twenty to ninety days. Any place where litiuor is sold in violation of the law is declared to be a nuisance, and may be abated by proceedings at law or C(iiiity. This j)rovision afifo/ds a powerful means for enforcing the law, since it avoids the risks of failure before the grand or |)etty jury, and if successfully aj)plied leads up to an injunction. The licence law does not affect the side of alcohol for scientific, mechanical, or medicinal purposes, but druggists may sell liquor only on a written medicinal prescription ; one prcscrii)lion to cover only one sale. After some doubt, it was decided that there was no dis- cretion under the lirooks Law to refuse a wholesale licence except for misconduct ; but an Act passed in 1891 gave this discretionary power, and further forbade the consumption on the premises of lic^uor sold under a wholesale Ucence. This Act immediately reduced the numl)er of applicants for wholesale licences from 1,600 to 563. Under statutes antecedent to the Brooks Law, but still in force, the punishment for drunkenness is a fine of .'#2, to be paid to the treasurer of the school district ; any person furnishing liquor in contravention of the law is to be held civilly liable for all conse- c|ucnccs of his act, and full damages may be recovered from him ; anil the relations of a dnnikard may give notice to saloon-kce])ers not to sell to him. Anyone selling in contra\ention of the notice "- ble to be sued for damages, from .^50 to iji'soo- rhe chief merit of the Brooks Law is held to lie in the vesting of the licensing power in a judicial body of high position, with unlimited authority to refuse licences at their discretion. The Court of Quarter Sessions is composed of the higher Judges in the State. The Judges are elected for a term often years, and are therefore, to a great extent, removed from popular and personal intiuencci. It commonly happens, when a vacancy occurs, that the two political parties will agree in the nominalion of a candid.iie ; so that, there being no contest, there is no ^ ^^%^ PExxsv/j'.tm.i. 229 I. SI III ciity Lihc, nor opportunity, when a Judge is put ui) for re-election, for paying otV personal grudges. The following extract from the Tenth Annual Report of the Law and Order Society of IMiiladelphia shows the ini[)orlance attached to this feature of the law : — " Important as are the various provisions of the IJrooks Law to the good order of our city, there is no one which effects so much practical good as that which conmiits the granting of licences to our Juili^ca . . . the one class of men for whom our citizens, \vitliout distinction of party or sect, feel an unc|iialilied respect and confidence as administrators of such a trust." 'I'he complete extent of the discretionary power to refuse licences is shown by the fact that in at least one county (out of between sixty and seventy) no retail licences at all are issued. The immediate effect of the Hrooks Law was a reduction in the number of licences in Philadelphia from 5,773 to 1,746 (70 per cent.), the latter number including about 400 wholesale licences.* Li 1S90 there was an increase, due to the legal decision tliat the limitations of the Brooks T-aw did not ai)|)ly to wholesale licences, and a larger issue of these licences accordingly ensued. 'J'he limit between wholesale and retail under the Pennsylvania law is one ([uart. When the court decided that wholesale licences could not be withheld, there was immediately a great increase in their number. Many applications were made by persons who had been refused retail li'jences, their real object being to do a retail business under a wholesale licence. In many instances they evaded the law by selling beer iii quart mugs half full of froth, or by supplying cups or glasses, so that the purchaser of a quart of spirits could share it with others on the spot. In 1891, on the passage of the law conferring a discretionary power to refuse wholesale as well as retail houses, the number of licences again fell. * In 1888, when the new law first came into operation, there were 3,426 applications for retail Hcences. Of these, 1,340 were granted, 1,952 were refused, and 134 were withdrawn. 230 Amk/k/cax Liquor Laws. Turning to the criminal statistics of Phila(lt'l[)hia, we find tlint a com))arison of arrests for drunkenness between the years i.S.Sy-S and 1891-2 shows a diminution of more than 25 i)cr cent., and the difference is still greater if allowance is made lor increase in ])opulation. 'Hie returns, however, for the year immediately following the passage of the new law sl-.owed a diminution of arrests by about 40 i)er cent., so that the rate of imi)rovement appears not to have been fully maintained. The following table shows a somewhat close connection betwee . the number of licences and the number of arrests for intoxication and disorderly conduct : — •> ; No. of I.icfiuos. Year. Wholesale ;u)d No. of Arrests. increase or decrease. 18S7, to June, 1 888 Retail. 5,773 June, 32,974 i ), 1888, to ,, 1889 1,746 19,887 Decrease, 13,087 1, 1889, to ,, 1890 1,739 2l,f)(J9 Increase, 2,082 ,, 1890, to ,, 1 89 1 2,092 25,810 Increase, 3,841 >i 1891, to ,, 1892 1,791* 24,627 '■ Decrease, 1,183 The same connection appears in the following statement Licences. Arrests for Intoxicaiicm. 1890. I89I. —January to June (5 months) ... —January to June (5 months) .. 1,737 2,092 8,587 9,536 Increase — June to Dccem1)er (7 niontlis) — June to I3ecember (7 months) 355 949 IS90. IS9I. 2,092 1,791 16,074 15.249 Decrease 301 825 1 * At the Annual Licensing Meeting in 1892, al)iiut 1,890 licences were granted (1,388 retail). In 1S93 there was ^ considerable rise to 2,181 (1,632 retail). The additional licences are said to be chiefly in the new and growing parts of the city. 'i-J. y V; .v.A'.s- )•/./•. I. \/.^. !3i IK I lirs )cr lor hi )• ;i of i The Hoard of Public Charilics of Pennsylvania, in their report for i8aw, and the consequent reduction in the number of saloons, brought about a further large diminution of Sunday drinking, as is shown by the following figures ; — 232 American Liquor L.iirs. Monday morning commitments for drunkenness Sundays :— 1886- --87 ... 2,101 1887- -88 ... 1,263 18S8- -89 (first year under Brooks Law) ... 381 1889- -90 621 1890- -91 764 1891- -92 711 on The "drunks'' are all sentenced to pay a small fine. If they fail to ])ay, they are locked up for twenty-four hours. Monday, formerly the heaviest day in the week, is now by far the lightest. These figures conclusively prove the great change which has taken place in regard to Sunday drinking, a change due in ])art to the exertions of the Law and Order Society prior to the passing of the Brooks Law, and in part to the operation ' '* that law."^ Children used to he much employed in "running the growler," i.e., bringing kettles and jugs to the liquor shops for drink for their i)arents. This [)ractice is stojjped by the new law. It is the opinion of some that the Brooks Law has increased home drinking; but fhis is an opinion which it is very difficult to verify. The general opinion respecting the practical working and results of the law at Philadelphia appears to be on the whole favourable. The statis'ics already given undoubtedly seem to indicate an imi)rovement in the condition of the town as regards intemperance and also as regards law-breaking, so far at least as the Sunday law is concerned. The following table shows the arrests for breaches of the liquor law in Philadelphia : — ^'e.1r. Selling without Licence. Selling on Sunday. Selling to Minors. 1S9O 1891 217 5H 12 5 6 4 \ * rhiladelpliia is one of the few cities in tlie United States where guests in liotcls are denied wine on Sundays. PF.N.YSVLVAXrA. 233 I If the foregoing figures are compared with the returns furnished by the Board of Pubhc Charities of convictions for breach of the liquor law throughout the State, a wide dis- crepancy is indicated between arrests and convictions. 1S87 Convictions for breach of liquor law throughout the State 199 iSSS ,, ,, lincluding iS in I'hiladelphia) 161 1 891 ,, ,, (including 7 1 in Philadelphia) 275 It api^ears, therefore, that in 1891 upward of 500 arrests for offences of this class were made in Philadelphia to only 71 convictions, certainly a remarkable disparity. Many arrests are made and indictments found which are not tried for a long time, when witnesses have vanished ; and some are never tried at all. The criminal court is, or recently was, greatly in arrear with its business ; I was informed that more than a thousand indictments were awaiting trial. There has, moreover, been a great disinclination on the part of juries to convict, even on positive testimony. As an instance, I may mention a case which hap])ened to be tried at the time when this subject was engaging my attention. l"he defendant was charged with selling licjuor by retail, having only a bottler's licence. The evidence was overwhelming ; yet the jury remained out all night, and at last came to a compromise by finding a verdict of guilty, coupled with a recommendation to mercy.* * In passing sentence the Judge said, addressing the prisoner : — "The jury have coupled their verdict of guilty with a recommendation to mercy. Whether that represents their conviction as to the extent of your culpability, or whether it represents a bridge by which they have reconciled their ditfer- enc- •, I do not know. As they passed almost twenty-four hours coming to an agreement, I strongly suspect that it was a compromise. There is no doubt of your guilt. The offence is /not a new one; it was always an offence for a bottler to sell at retail ; hence you cannot plead surprise. The fact that you used your bottler's licence as a shield and cover to the illicit traffic makes it more culpable," The Judge then referred to the fact that the growth of unlicensed places was on the increase, as the records of the court showed. For four years efforts had been made to exterminate "speak-easies," but without success, and he said that in his judgment no man after four years' warning coukl violate this law without doing so deliberately. It was a deliberate, continued, and 234 American Liquor Laws. In Phikidelphia, as in most cities of the United States, the dependence of the law on an active pubHc opinion for its efficient enforcement is manifest ; and public opinion does not here a])pear to call for more than a moderate degree of vigour in the prosecution of violaters of the liquor law. The unwillingness of juries to convict in licpior cases is no uncommon thing."^ Moreover, national as well as local political exigencies tend to discourage great activity in this direction. If, for example, the anti-li(iuor party of any State, supporting themselves on a Re- publican majority, show symptoms of proceeding to extremities, the word is brought to the Republican headquarters at Washing- ton, through the agents of the liquor interest, that the party will be in danger of losing votes in other States unless the obnoxious movement is suppressed ; and means are found accordingly to restrain it. For a mayor or other official to put his whole force into the suppression of violations of the liquor law, in defiance of his party, would appear an act of treason. Whatever causes may have been at work, the beneficial change which at first manifested itself hardly seems to have been fully maintained. While a great improvement has taken place in Philadelphia in regard to Sunday drinking, and while statistics appear to indicate a considerable decrease of general drunkenness, as a result of restriction on the granting of licences, the law is still evaded to an extent which would be impossible, if the full endeavours of the police and executive were directed I sustained purpose to defy the law. If it had not been for the recommenda- tion of the jury, he would impose upon the defendant the full penalty of the law, but in consideration of that he would reduce the sentence to six months and a fine of .^500. A rule was taken on the defendant to show cause why his licence should not be revoked, and on the testimony adduced the Judge revoked the licence. * The gentleman who acted as prosecuting counsel told me of one case of this kind, in which the police evidence was ample for a conviction ; and no evidence was offered contra ; yet the jury acquitted. PEXXSVLr.lXlA. ■35 to its enforcement, (^uitc recently, tlure is said to liave been a considerable increase in the nuniber of " speak-easies '' (the term commonly used in this State to describe places where liquor is illegally sold) ; efforts were being made in the latter part of i8tj2 to reduce them, and a large number of prosecutions had been undertaken.* As regards the character of the licensed Hquor-dealers, the new law operated beneficially. The Judges acted (especially in the early days) with great care and discrimination as regards appHcations. Latterly, there has been a tendency to relajisc, in some degree, from the standard originally set up.t Objection is taken by some critics to the principle of selection in dealing with applications for licences, as being invidious and unfair ; and i* '': as been suggested that the licences should rather be put up to auction — the licensing authorities merely fixing the number to be issued, and exercising a right of veto in the case of any person whose character might be objectionable. In Pittsburg (population 238,500) — the second city in the State — the liquor law is said to be well enforced, speak-easies being now comparatively scarce, and their business a precarious one. In 1889, it was believed by the police department that there were nearly 800 such places in the city. In 1890, between 300 and 400 illicit liquor-sellers were prosecuted and punished in the first police district alone. They were proceeded against summarily for keeping disorderly houses— a procedure which, being speedier and surer, was deemed more effective than that by indictment for breach of the liquor law, which, in case ot conviction, would have involved a sentence of imprisonment. * The detection of these "speak-easies" is often a difficult matter — customers being admitted only by pass-words or private latch-keys. f A correspondent in Philadelphia writes to me in April, 1893; — "Just now there is a disposition on the part of the Judges in this city to grant licences very freely. Some persons think that the Judges are doing this because they do not like the business, and want the people to take it out ol their hands and put it into the hands of an Excise Commission." l<'or the number of licences issued in the last two years, sec p. 230, note. 236 American Liquor Laifs. A large num1)er of the offenders were women having families dependent on them. Since that period, there seems to have been no great amount of law-breaking, either on the i)art ot licensed dealers or through speak-easies. ''J'he trouble from the latter source arises mainly on Sundays, when the licensed premises are closed. The superintendent of police, in his annual report, dated February t, 1892, stated : — "The liquor laws have been rigidly enforced, and there has been a notable falling-off in violations of the same. Club-houses are being conducted in an orderly and quiet manner, and jug-houses and speak-easies have been almost wholly eradicated. There are, however, a few speak-easies springing up, on Sunday especially, and which require constant vigilance to suppress. They are usually carried on by widows seeking to secure a little money for the support of themselves and children. . . . The admirable distril)ution of licences by the Licence Court has done much toward eradicating the illegal liquor traffic, as the saloons are fairly distributed and sufficient in number for the accommoda- tion of the drinking class, and, consequently, there is no occasion or illegal li(|uor-selling." In the report for the preceding year, also, the condition of fair immunity from speak-easies was attributed, in part, to the fact that the Licence Court had increased the number of retail licences from 92 to nearly 300. Complaint has been made in Pittsburg of the mischief done by the "jug" trade carried on under a wholesale licence. The figures following are taken from the official reports ot Pittsburg : — Vear ending January 31. 1890. 1891. 19.449 1892. Arrests — total : — 2I,SoO Drunk 5,222 6,676 6,910 Disorderly ... 5,448 7,442 7.732 Retail licences 92 nearly 30O . . . Police force, all ranks ... 271 304 3" Pennsylvania, 237 The chief of the department of pubHc safety in Allegheny (population 105,300), in his report for 1891, urged that a greater number of licences should be granted by the court— a course which he thought would largely diminish the number of speak- easies, and facilitate the work of the police department in its endeavour to stamp them out. l^he police had been newly organised in that year, and the new superintendent reported that, on taking office, he had found a vast amount of illegal liquor-selling. At the present time, I am told that the law is fairly well enforced. ALLEGHENY. Arrests — total : — Drunk Disorderly Selling without licence .. Tolice force, all ranks Year ending \ Nine months, February 28, iSyo. 'April to December, 1891. 3.730 1,911 113 The census returns show that insanity prevails in Penn- sylvania to about the same extent as in 1880— the ratio of the insane to the whole population being as follows : — 1880 1890 I to 615 I to 620 There has, therefore, been a very slight proportionate decrease of insanity during the last decade. Of 1,726 patients admitted in 1891 to the various institutions for the insane, the insanity of 1 1 1 was attributed to alcoholism or intemperance. The number of " indoor " paupers in the State on September 30, 1890, was 9,113; on the corresponding day in 189T, the number was 9,211. Of 12,452 adult paupers admitted during 1891 (an increase of 628 as compared with the preceding year), 1,347 were returned as abstainers, 2,573 as moderate drinkers, and 1,289 as intemperate. Of the habits of more than one hah' of the whole number no information is given. 238 CHAP'JER Xlll. MINNESOTA AND NEliRASKA. (High-licence ) Minnesota. HiGH-LiCENCb; and local 0[)tioii are the distinguishing char- acteristics of the liquor legislation in this State. In one of its cities also the trade has been circumscribed in a special manner, which does not appear to have been adopted in any other place in the country. Minnesota has more than usually stringent laws respecting the forfeiture of licences for mis- conduct ; and a scale of increased punishments on repeated convictions for drunkenness has recently (1889) been enacted. The local option law is capable of only partial applica- tion, being restricted to the rural portions of the State. It provides that the voters of any incorporated village or muni- cipal township may determine for themselves the question whether licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor as a beverage shall be granted or not. On the })etition of ten or more voters the vote is to be taken at the next ensuing annual election, and, if the majority is against licence, none can be granted, except for medicinal or mechanical purposes. If the majority is in favour of licence, the village council is (in the case of an incorporated village) made the licensing authority, to the exclusion of the Board of County Commissioners. It is not easy to ascertain to what extent throughout the Slate such votes have been taken. The State (lovernment takes no share of the licence fees, and is therefore not interested in the question ; nor is a general return made to any authority. There appears to be among many of those who favour advanced anti-liquor legislation a tendency rather to consider this measure of local option as being too inauequate to be of much value than to exert any organised efforts for making the utmost Minnesota. !39 possible use of it. In not a few communities, however, " no- licence" votes have been carried, and local prohibition is the law, but I am not able to give the number of such places, nor any near approximation of their proportion to the rest of the State. A leading minister of religion in one of the chief cities, keenly interested in social questions, told me that the local option law, such as it was, had had litde effect worth mention- ing. Apart from the operation of this law, however, there is a certain number of municipalities which do not in fact issue licences. It is said that an effort will be made to secure the passing of a new measure providing for local option by counties. The licence law may be briefly stated as follows : — Applications for licences have to be published, and objections heard. If the applicant appears to have violated any of the liquor laws of the State or municipality within a year previous to the application (or, as regards some offences, within five years), the licensing authority, i.e., the Board of County Commissioners, or the governing body of any municipal corporation, is to refuse to grant the licence. The applicant must enter into a bond in >r2,ooo, with two freeholders of the county as sureties. The licence fee in cities of 10,000 uihabitants and upwards is fixed at !i?i,ooo, or such higher sum as the city council may prescribe ; elsewhere §500, or such higher fee as the local authority prescribe. Registered druggists may dispense intoxicating liquors on medical prescription without any licence, for consumption off the premises. Physicians who give prescriptions for the purpose of evading the liquor law are liable to be fmed. Licensed premises, except hotels, are to be closed from 1 1 p.m. to 5 a.m. ; and conviction of violating this rtile involves forfeiture of the licence, as well as a fine. No liquor may be sold to a miner, student, or drunkard. Notice not to sell may be given by relativc;s and employers. The penalty for selling without a licence is a fine from .^50 to .'^loo, and imprisonment from thirty to ninety days. Prosecutions may be taken in a summary manner before a municipal court or justice of the peace, in the same manner as for violations of municipal ordinances or bye-laws. Special additional penalties 2 40 American Liquor Laws, arc enacted for tlic use of certain devices known as the "blind jji^V' " liole-in-thc-wall," etc. The county attorney is required to prosecute all violations of the Act. The owner as well as the occupier may be held liable, if the law is broken with his knowlcdire. I'2very sheriff and constable is re([uircd to arrest offenders ; and any jud^a", officer, or constable, who wilfully neglects or refuses to do his duty is to be deemed guilty of a malfeasance in office and dis(|iudified from holding it, and is to be fined. The licensing authority may revoke a licence on proof to their satisfaction that the licensee has violated any of the liquor laws or any of the conditions of his licence. On revocation for selling to a minor, or drunkard, or after notice forbidding such sale, the offender is dis(|ualified for five years from being again licensed, in all other cases for one year. A licence also becomes ipso facto void upon conviction in any court for selling to a minor, habitual drunkard, or intemperate person after notice. The court, on convicting anyone of an offence under the liquor law, is required to certify the conviction to the licensing authority. The i)cnalties for becoming voluntarily intoxicated are : — First offence, fine %?io to >?4o, or imprisonment ten to forty days ; second offence, imprisonment thirty to si\t\' days, or fine S2o to 830 ; subsequent offences, imprisonment sixty to ninety days. It will appear, from what has been said, that the principle of local option has had but partial recognition in the law of Minnesota, and in practice has met with no large measure of attention or development. High-licence, on the other hand, has for some years received, and is receiving, a fair and sustained trial \ and few States offer a better field for observing this system in its most favourable aspect. From incjuiries made in the two leading cities of the State, J believe it may safely be said that its operation has i)roved on the whole satisfactory in the estimation of the majority of those who have had the best opportunity of observing its effects, and who are most interested in the suppression of the evils which it was intended to meet ; and that (apart from the movement already mentioned for extending the right of local option — a movement affecting the 5:n;aller towns and the country districts, but hardly MixyrsoTA. 241 likely to affect the principal centres of population) there are few States in which there is less ai)[)earance of an active disposition to agitate for any considerable changes in the existing li([uor laws. The city of St. Paul, the official capital of the State, w'xiU a population, according to the census of 1890, of 133,000, had, at the commencemeiU of i855 7,54(^ 6,862 7,098 5>277 C\)mmittedtotheCity\Vorkhouse: Drunk . . • . . . 867 778 Drunk and disorderly * . . • • ■ . . • 282 221 Police force ... ... ... ... 178 Since 1890, the number of licences has been reduced ; at the beginning of 1893 there were only 362, and the sittings of the Licence Committee of the municipality, which commenced * Fourteen months. t High-licence, $i,ooc. Previously it had been $100. 246 American Liquor Laws. in that month, were expected to result in a further slight reduction. MINNKAI'OIJS (]-)oi)ulation 164,738). 1 1887 1888. 1889. 1890. 1 1 1891. 1892. Number of licences Arrests : — ... 23 :> ... 274 Drunkenness Disorderly conduct Violation of liquor law (selling to 2,619 2,300 456 1,809 440 1,916 minors, on Sun day, without li- cence, eta.) Whole numl)er of arrests I'olice force*^ ... ... i ... i ... ... J ... 112 5,216 217 63 5.156 225 5,866 AVERA(;E NUMliER OF I'RISCJNKRS IN THK CI I'Y WORKHOTSES OF SI", I'AUL AND MINNKAl'OLIS. St. Paul. Minneapolis. i«S8 145 75 1889 161 ... 113 1890 ... 129 98 The decided falling-off in the numbers in 1890 "appears" (according to the report of the Secretary of the Board of Corrections and Charities) " to be a part of the general decline of the criminal population of the State." The practice of repeatedly sentencing prisoners to imprisonment for a few days is strongly condemned in the report as being worse than useless. PRISON CKNSnS. 1885. December, 888. 1889. i 1890. Prisoners serving sentence throughout the State 652 785 856 742 In this part of the country most of the oi)position to temperance legislation seems to proceed from the (iermans. * Compared with most other cities in the United States, Minneapolis has a relatively small police force. Mlwyesot.u 247 The liquor trade is mainly in their hands ; and they are very tenacious of their opinions and habits. The Irisli are said to be generally more temperate here than in New York, Boston, and elsewhere in the East, and are not so much engaged in the licjuor trade ; they appear to have fallen upon different con- ditions of life in the West, and to be subject to different moral and material influences. Many of the Scandinavians also, in the second or third generation, are not merely tem[)erate, but active workers for temperance, and they form an excellent element among the population of foreign origin, adopting readily the laws and customs of their fellow-citizens by adoption. A movement which is in progress, to obtain a reduction in the licence-fees, receives its support mainly from the (iermans. The merits claimed for the high-licence system of Minnesota are : that it suppresses the worst and lowest class of saloons ; that it reduces the number in the outlying and residential parts of the city, because there is not business enough to repay the licence-fees (high-licence thus producing, to some extent, the results directly secured in Minneapolis by the patrol limit law); that it concentrates the trade in the business centre of the town, where the force of police is most numerous and best able to control it ; that it diminishes the influence of the saloon in politics ; that it is a security for good conduct on the part of the licence- holders, through the fear of forfeiture ; and that it secures to the authorities the co-operation of the licence-holders in enforcing the law against unlicensed dealers. Doubts have sometimes, and in some places, been expressed about the extent of such co-operation, and it is sometimes declared to be altogether a delusion. I am, however, assured on the best authority that in Minnesota the police do really get information from this quarter of the existence and locality of illegal groggeries —the source of such information being in all cases kei)t secret. Unlicensed groggeries (" blind pigs," as they are called) do undoubtedly, to some extent, exist. In that district of St. I'aul where no licences are allowed, I was informed that a secret trade 248 American Liquor Laws. was known to be carried on. But, though such violations of the law are not entirely sui)prcssed, I was assured that the police were, on the whole, able to keep a pretty close hold on this business, and that there was no great amount of it. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain any precise answer to the (juestion whether high-licence has produced any marked effect on the aggregate consumption of alcoholic drinks. The amount of li(juor actually consumed in any given place is an unknown and unascertainable cjuantity. A system which largely diminishes the sources of supi)ly, and increases the average distance separating the saloon from its customers, would seem likely, a priori^ to have some effect in contracting the amount of business done by saloon-keepers ; and the social customs of Americans, before referred to, would tend to strengthen this expectation. If recourse is had to the statistics of drunkenness and crit)ie for light upon the question of actual results, the returns above given from St. Paul and Minneapolis do not a[)pear at first sight to sup})ly a basis for any positive conclusion. In St. Paul, the first year of high-licence (1888) did not yield any diminution in the arrests for drunkenness ; indeed, considering that the figures for the preceding year cover fourteen months, there seems to have been a slight increase. In the following year a further increase appears; but in 1890 there was a considerable fall. Two facts, however, affecting any inference to be drawn from these figures, must be taken into account. One is the great and constant increase of po^iulation, an increase supplied by foreign immigrants, who for the most part are not teetotallers. The " twin cities " are the new home of a great number of Scandinavians, Germans, and Irish. In Minneapolis more than one-third of the population is of Scandinavian origin. There is, I believe, a larger proportion of Scandinavians in Minnesota than in any other State of the Union. "^ The Germans, though confirmed beer-drinkers, * The Swedes are the most numerous section \\\ this Slate. In MlNXESOTA. 249 \ seldom get into trouble on this account. Prolonged residence in America leads a considerable proportion of the Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians, after a time, to adopt principles and habits of abstinence ; but on their arrival in the country of their adoption many of them are hard drinkers, pure alcohol being a common beverage with them. The drinking habits of the immigrants would naturally tend to keep up or to increase the returns of arrests for drunkenness. The other fact alluded to is the increased efficiency of the police control which directly results from the reduction in the number of drink-shops, leading to a higher ratio of arrests to offences committed. The partisans of high-licence claim this as one of the most prominent advantages of the system ; but obviously those whose attention has not been drawn to this fact may be led by its effects upon statistics to draw unfavourable inferences. The general aspect of both cities is orderly, and a drunken man will very rarely be met with on the streets. That high-licence has, in Minner^ota, actually brought al)OUt a diminution of drinking and drunkenness, at least in the chief centres of population, is, I believe, the decided opinion of the great majority of those best able to judge. The extreme advocates of prohibition are strongly opposed to the system, both on general grounds of morality, and es])ecially on the ground that the public revenue derived from it perverts the taxpayer, and constitutes the most formidable of all obstacles to the furtherance of their policy. They deny that high- licence diminishes drinking, and urge that it only serves to concentrate the trade and increase the profits of brewers and distillers. In proof of this contention they quote cases of persons interested in the trade who have been su[)porters of high-licence. I do not propose in this place to pursue further Wisconsin (which nlso aUracts many imniigranls of this race) the Norwegians preponderate. 25© American Liquor Laws. the general cjuestion of the merits and failings of this system, a task which can he more usefully undertaken after a separate examination has been made of its working in the several States which have adopted it. I merely record here my belief that, so far as Minnesota is concerned, the drift of unbiassed public opinion — aside from those who are either uncompromising advocates of i)rohibition on the one hand, or manufacturers or sellers of intoxicating licjuor on the other— is, after an experience of several years, favourable to the view that high- licence has produced practical good results, and is on the whole the best system to be adopted under the existing conditions of the commimity. While this system has closed many saloons in the chief cities, it has also materially affected the trade in some of the smaller towns, where there is less custom, and where conse- quently it is less easy to make a sufficient profit on the business after reixiying the outlay on the licence fee. A number of facts and opinions collected from rejircsentative Republicans in different parts of the State, after eight months' experience of high-licence, were published in the St Paiil Pioneer Press (April 4th, 1888). The 0})inions were, with very few exceptions, favourable to the new law, though in some cases further restrictions were advocated ; and in a few places it was thought that not much difference in the amount of drinking had resulted. In one town the saloons had been reduced from twenty to ten, in another from five to three, in another from three to one, in another from six to four. In others large reductions were recorded. The census returns credit Minnesota with a remarkablv low proportion both of convicts and of paupers. Its prison population (including penitentiaries and county jails) is absolutely the lowest in proportion to population of any of the twelve States which are grouped together in the census under the heading "Northern Central," the ratio being 492 per million inhabitants. The States ranking next to Minnesota iMlynesotj. 251 in the group are Iowa, Wisconsin and Nebraska, while the worst return comes from Kansas — 946 per milHon.* Of paupers in almshouses {i.e., "indoor" paujjcrs), Minnesota is credited with 280 per million of the population, this being a lower return than that of any State in the group, with the exception of the Dakotas and Nebraska. In regard to insanity the case is different, Minnesota showing a ratio higher than the average of its group, and nearly as high as that of the whole country. The victims of insanity are supplied in a degree disproportionate to their numbers by the Scandinavians. This race, forming 16-5 per cent, of the inhabitants of the State, furnishes 28 per cent, of the inmates of insane asylums, while at the same time it furnishes only 8-8 per cent, of the convicts.! The following table shows a constantly-progressive increase of insanity in this State during twenty years : — Ratio of insane to population 1870. I in 1875 I in 1,375 1880. I in 1,078 1885. 1890. I in «45 I in 666 IH * See the table on p. 19. The foreign-born inhabitants of Minnesota are 38 per cent, of the whole population ; they contribute 33 per cent, of the State prison population, and 61 per cent, of the insane. Of eight r.'presentative eastern and central States (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts), Minnesota is the only one in which foreign nationalities furnish less than their share of State prison convicts. Scandinavians and Germans show a low rate of criminality in all these States. English-speaking immigrants furnish on the average one-third more than their share. The same general facts hokl good as regards convicts in city workhouses. {See Report of State Board of Corrections and Charities of Minnesota foi iSSS, pp. 72 — 4.) + It has been suggested that the change of life, and greatly improved living, with better material conditions generally, have tcndetl to produce affections of the brain among the Scandinavians. Farming is their usual occupation. T r o Ami-.rican LiouoR Laws. Tlic ('orrcs[)oiKling ratio in six other States is as lollows ;- Massachusetts rcmisylvania Micliii^an Indiana ... Illinois ... Wiscnnsin 1 m 417 I in 72U I in S74 1 in 909 I in 645 I in 550 'I'hc Secretary to tlie JJoard of State Corrections and Charities told me that he attributed the high return for insanity in Minnesota in i)art to the fact that all their insane (except those kept in their own families) were in the State asylums, and that the return was probably more complete than elsewhere. Nebraska. 'i'his, though one of the more newly-settled States, was the first to attempt 10 deal with the li(iuor i)rol)lem by means of a high-licence fee. 'J'his law has now been in o|)eration since 1881.* In the fust year, when Oniaha had a population of about 30,000, the number of saloons in that city was reduced from 152 to 80 ; and, at the present time, they are considerably fewer in proportion to the population. \\\ earlier days the number was still greater. An old resident told me that, with a population of about 15,000, the saloons numbered 220. As the pioneer in this form of legislation, Nebraska has attracted much attention, and widely divergent opinions have found expression regarding the results of the experiment. In 1890, a popular vote was taken on the question of ado[)ting prohibition into the Constitution, when the proposed amendment was rejected by 111,728 votes to 82,292. Under the Slociun Law of 1881, a licence may be granted only on a petition — in an incorporated city or village, from thirty resident * The previous law, passed in 185S, allowed the County Commissioners lo fix the licence-fee an\\v]ieie between $25 and $500, and cities could impose an additional amoui.t not exceeding $i,ooc. As a matter of fact, liquor-sellers in Lincoln had to p.ay $1,000 from 1877, • I \ N'i-:nRASKA. 253 freeholders, and, elsewhere, from a majority of them. The licensinj; authority in Omaha is the Hoard of Fire and Police Commissioners ; in Lincoln, the Excise Board ; in other cities, the City Council ; in incorporated villages, the Board of Trustees ; and elsewhere, the County lioard. Notice of the application for a licence has to be published ; and, if any objection is made to it, a day is appointed for the hearin;^^ wlien, if it is proved that the applicant has violated ihe litjuor law within a year, or has had a former licence revoked, the application must be refused. Otherwise, the licensini,^ authority may grant the licence, " if deemed expedient." County Commissioners are not allowed to issue a licence within two miles of any city, exce|)t Omaha. The licence operates for not more than a year, and may be revoked by the licensing authority on conviction of violation of the law. The licence-fee is fixed by the licencing authority, but may not be less than $r, 000 in cities wi'.h a population exceeding 10,000. or $500 elsewhere. And the licensee is required, in every case, to enter into a bond in the sum of $5,000 with two freeholders of the county as sureties. No one may be surely on more than one such bond. The following offences and penalties are enacted :— Selling to a minor— fine $25.* Selling to an Indian, insane person, idiot, or habitual drunkard — fine $50. Selling or giving liquor to an Indian, not a citizen— fine $i,ood, or imprisonment, 2 to 5 years.t Selling- or keeping for sale without a licence— fine $I03 to $500, or imprisonment not exceeding i month.| Selling liquor adulterated with strychnine, strontia, sugar of lead, or any other substance — fine $100. Selling on an election day—fine $roo. The civil damage law in Nebraska is peculiar. It is enacted that—" The person so licensed shall pay all damages that the community or individuals may sustain in consequence of such traffic ; he shall support all paupers, widows, or orphans, and the expenses * A minor who falsely represents his age is also liable to punishment. t By an Act passed in 1891. X Home-made wine may be sold in (luantilies of not less than one gallon, without a licence. Warrants for searcli and seizure maybe issued on sworn information, and, on conviction, the liquor is to be destroyed. 254 ^mj:kican L/quor Laus. of all civil and criminal prosecutions growini; out of, or justly attributed to, his traffic in inloxicatinj; drinks." Such damages and expenses may be recovered by an action on his bond. On a person becoming a pauper by reason of intemperance, the Poor Law authorities may sue on the bond of any licensee who was in the habit of supplying him with li(|Uor. In a suit against a licensee on account of acts done or injuries inllicted by a person under the mflucnce of litiuor, it is only necessary to prove that the defendant supplied li([Uor to him on the day or about the time when the acts were done or the i?\'uries received. All fines are paid to the School IJoard, and the c Maining witness is to receive out of the local funds under the .ol of the licensing authority a sum equal to one- fourth of the amount so paid. Permits may be issued to druggists, subject to the general licensing provisions (bu(; without payment of the licence fee), for the sale of liquor for medicinal, mechanical, and chemical purposes. The licensing authorities of cities and incorporated villages, how- ever, may by ordinance prescribe regulations for druggists. Every druggist is to keep a detailed record, open to public inspection, of his sales of liciuor, and to report on oath half-yearly to the licensing authority. Penalty — fine $20 to $100, and imprisonment, 10 to 30 days. Any person found in a state of intoxication is to be arrested, and, on conviction, fined $10, or imprisoned not more than 30 days. Put the punishment may be wholly or partially remitted, on his giving sworn information when, where, and from whom he received the liquor. All vendors of liquors are required to keep their doors and windows unobstructed by screens or otherwise. " Treating." or giving away liquor in any saloon or other public place where liquor is sold for consumption on the premises, is prohibited under penalty. The law, of which a summary is given in the foregoing paragraphs, is peciUiar in several respects. The requirement that, in the rural districts, an applicant for a licence must obtain the support of a majority of the freeholders in the district appears, at first sight, to be a far-reaching measure of local option, which it is in form. In practice, however, it has little or no operation, inasmuch as there are very few persons, Nehraska. 255 if any, desirous of setting up liquor shops in townships outside of incorporated villages. Such areas are very thinly poi)ulated, and would not supjiort saloons paying a licence-fee of $500. Outside the villages, therefore, the law is practically prohibitory. In the cities and villages, an application for a licence has to be backed by thirty freeholders only ; but the licensing authorities have unfettered discretion, and, where the public sentiment demands or allows it, they may refuse all a[)plications. There are, in fact, many places in the State where no licences are issued. York County, for example, is or has been without a single licence; in Polk County none has ever been issued. The (pestion of licence or no licence is sometimes made a direct issue in the election of commissioners, so that in its municipalities Nebraska has in fart, though not in form, local option. The draftsman of the Slocum Law -a lawyer in Lincoln — assured me that, where no licences are issued, the law is generally well enforced. In his view, the plan adopted in Nebraska is more efficient as a measure of local option than the system of the direct veto — his argument being that a greater force of sentiment is rec^uired to elect a non-licensing board than to carry a direct "no licence" vote, because, in the latter case, people are apt to be influenced by pressure from women and extremists, and not to vote according to their own de- liberate judgment, as they generally do in electing a licensing authority with discretionary j)owers. Therefore, when this authority refuses to grant licences, there is always a strong majority in favour of their action, and the law enforces itself. Fluctuations of public sentiment soon reflect themselves on the licensing board, and changes to and fro between licence and no licence are not very uncommon. ^" ^braska has two large towns— Omaha, with about 150,000 inhabitants (140,450 in 1890), and Lincoln (the State capital), with nearly 60,000. There are only three other towns which in 1890 had populations exceeding 10,000. The western half of 256 AiVr.RicAX LfQi'OR A. I US. the State is very thinly iiihahitcd, and the State as a whole lias only thirteen heads to the s(iiiare mile. In Omaha, 277 ai)[)li(ations for licjuor licences were made in 1S91, and 251 lidiires"''" were granted (besides 72 permits to druggists). This gives a ratio of one licence for nearly 600 people. The following statistics relate to Omaha. Compared with most other cities, the return of arrests for drunkenness is- remarkably low in proportion to the poi)ulation : — lOuly. 1 a(>L .091. Total mmiher of arrests ... .\nests for diiinkenncss (alone or com- bined with some ollu-r ol'lcnce) Arrests for violation of liquor laws 8,449 S.ilj 7,281 I 2,094 2,275 ( 1,667 4 + It should be noted that the regular police force of Omaha is extraordinarily small, only 88 of all ranks in 1891. There were, in addition, 52 special constables employed apparently on i)ermanent duty, and 93 more were appointed to assist in guarding the polls on election day ; 50 also on another special occasion. In Lincoln only about forty liquor licences are granted, considerably less than i to 1,000. I am not able to give any police statistics, but there is said to be, and doubtless is, very little drunkenness. An old resident told me that in the early days, when the population was only about 1,500, there were as many as thirty drinking places in Lincoln. The same advantages are claimed for high-licence in this State as in Minnesota and other States which have adopted it. Most of the low dives, the hot-beds of crime, have been rooted out. Saloons are more respectably conducted ; and licensees obey the law better themselves, and assist in suppressing the * This number includes wholesale as well as retail, hotels as well as saloons. A^/-:nh'.\sh-A. 257 illicii trade. So far as iny in([uirics went, llic law ai)i)caicd lo give great and general satisfa<:ti(jn. The common opinion aj)|)eare(l to be tliat it had proved the l)est hcjuor law in the United Stales. A clergyman of Omaha, who certainly was well ac(|iiainted with the social conditions of the town, and had a wide experience of men, expressed himself to me very favourably resi)ecting the state of the town in regartl to drunkenness, and said that he did not remember to have seen a drunken man on the streets. A feature, in which I found special credit claimed for the law of Nebraska, was the provision requiring the licensing authority to refuse to renew the licence of one who had l^een guilty of any breach of the law. The fear of forfeiture is said to keep the licjuor dealers on tlie alert as to their own conduct and that of their servants.* Much has been written and said for and against high- licence, with special reference to this State. Opponents of the Slocum Law have freciuently ([uoted in condenmation of it the fact that Mr. H. W. Hardy, who was Mayor of Lincoln when high-licence was inaugurated there, and who has been called the father of that system, subse(iuently became one of its most hostile critics. From his published statements it appears that he gave his support to high-licence as a prohibitionist, in the belief that it would prove to be a step towards ])rohibition, but that he subsequently adopted the views strongly hostile to high- licence, which are common with the extreme section of his party. It would, however, I believe, be difficult to prove anything like a general reaction of feeling to have taken place in Nebraska against the law of 1881. In 1888 (when high- licence had been in force for some seven years) letters were addressed to forty-eight gentlemen, who were deemed to be representative men, in different parts of the State, asking for * A lawyer surprised me by remarking that he had found saloon-keepers as jurymen specially severe with their l)rethren when tried for lireachcs of the liquor laws. R '5-^ r. Ami-.rhwn f.iniuiR L Mrs. fads, fij^urcs, and opinions rcs|)ccting the operation of tnc law. Of the thirty-four answers re(eiveportionately less often in the large towns, where it is difficult sometimes to trace cause and * The slatcmenls were nuMi.sliL'd in the Neoraska State /oiintai, March iSlli, iiS88. Among tlic writers favourable to the Hij^h-Lieence Law were the (ioverncjr, two ex-tiovernors, and the Secretary of .Slate, of Nel'raska ; the (Ihief Jusl'ce, ex-Chief Justice, and two y\ssociate Justices of the Supreme Court ; several other Judges ; presidents anraska. /Vr.nk'ASKA. 250 effect, and where saloon-keeiKTS are innucntial, tlian in .smaller places, 'i'hcrc is no doubt that this provision of the law is of real value. The following cases may he mentioned as instances. One of the fust lawyers in Nebraska told me that, when he was in general j)ractif e, he took proceedings against three .saloon- kee[)ers for the death of a man who staned home in his waggon under the influence of licjuor. 'j'he next day the waggon was found overturnerl, and the man dead. The amount recoverable was $5,000. In this case the saloon- keei)ers had some influence which affected the jury; but a verdict for $2,800 was obtained. In large cities the influence of salov.n-keei)ers with the juries oj)erates to some extent as a check on the full efiiciency of the civil damage law. In another case, a i)arty of |)ersons who had been drinking started home in two waggons. They began to race, collided, and a woman in one of the waggons fell out on her back and was paralysed. Another case was that of a man whr) lost his leg through frost-bite while intoxicated. In both cases the saloon-keepers against whom action was brought had to pay a large sum. Proceedings of this kind are taken, perhaps, once out of five times when ground for action exists. There appears to be no difficulty about getting convictions. The power also of the poor-law authorities to '^ue a saloon- keejicr for the maintenance of a drunken pauper is sometimes enforced. It is of |)ractical use. Sunday selling in Omaha has been checked, but not entirely sui)i)ressed. Until recently many of the [)Oorer ''sses were in the habit of crossing the river on Sunday to Council llluffs, Iowa, where there was less restricti(jn. 'i'he enactment |)rohil)iting screens is not fully enforced. That which jirohibits "treating" is, as might be expected, a dead letter. k 2 2 6 n c:iiAi'ri<:R xiv. M K II KiA N A \ I) M iSSo i; R I. (L()(;il Option.) A PROVISION ill the State (Constitution, i)rohil)itinL; the Legisla- ture from passing any Act authorising the grant of licences {ox the sale of int(jxicating liquors, was revoked hy resolution (;f the Legislature in 1X75 — the res(jlution being confirmed by a vote of the peojjlc in 1S76. J'rohibition, however, though it was 'he law (with an interval of only two years) fr(jin 1H53 to 1875, was but little enforced. In i< ai)patently to |iay both taxes. i I Michigan. 263 loss than $3,000 and not more than $6,000, with two sureties being male residents and freeholders of the same township, villaj^e, or city, and not holding any elective or ap|)ointivc office in the Slate (excejjt that of notary public). No one may be a surety on more than two such bonds. The amount and sufficiency of the bond has to be determined by the local authority, and the bond with a certificate of the aji|)roval of that authority has to be ])rescnted to the county treasurer before the ist of May in each year. The a|)proval of the local authority is to be withheld if the person is known to be one whose character and habits would render him or her an unfit |)erson to contiuct the business of lic|uor-selling. The penalty for selling without having entered into a bond, properly ajjproved, and without having paid the jiroper tax, is a fine up to $200, or imprisonment from 10 to 90 days, or both fine and imprisontnent. The offender further forfeits his tax, and is dis- (|ualified for a year from resuming business. Half of the tax goes to the township, village, or city ; the remainder to the county. It is tlie duty of every county officer, police officer, or other person having knowledge of any violation of the Act to inform the county attorney, and it is the duty of the county attorney forthwith to prosecute. If any officer wilfully neglects or refuses to do his duty under the Act, he is liable to a fine of $|(jo for each offence ; and the (Governor may .ippoint scMneone else to act for him. The selling of litpior to nfinors, to intoxicattd persons or per- sons in the habit of getting intoxicated, to Indians, to persons respecting whom a prohibitory notice has been given by a relative or employer, or by a member of the local authority or superintendent of the poor, is forbidden. Lic|uor may not be sold in a theatre or place of amusement ; and saloons must be closed (back and front) on Sundays, election days, or holidays ; and from 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. (except in cities and incorporated villages, where the hour for closing may, by local ordinance, be postponed till 1 1 p.m.). A peculiar provision of the IMichigan law is that which recpiircs a magistrate, on a sworn complaint that anyone has been intoxicated in an) public building or place, to compel him to appear, in order *' to testify in regard to the person or persons of whom, and the time when, and the place where, and the manner in which the li(|uor producing his intoxication was procured." He is then obliged to answer on oath the question : " When, where, and of whom did you procure, obtain, or receive the lic|uor or beverage, the drinking or 264 American Liquor Laws, usiiif,' of wliicli has contiibuted to the cause of the intoxication mcntioi.'xl in the complaint?" According to his answer, proceed- ings are to be taken against any who ap])ear to have violated the law ; but he himself is not to be prosecuted for his intoxication. In addition to the usual civil damage clause, both actual and exemplary damages are recoverable by a parent or master for the illegal sale of li(|urr to a minor. The \illage and city marshals, or llie ])olice, are rctiuired to visit weekly all places where li(|uor is s;)Id or kept, and to prosecute all olVeiidcrs against the ii(|uor law. The adulteration of li([uor is made a mibdemeanor punishable by fine, from $50 to $500, or imprisonment from 10 days to 6 months, or both ; and all casks, etc., are to be branded : "' Pure and without drugs or poison." During the hours of closing, all screens, etc., obstructing the view from the street must be reiTioved. The abortive Act of 1 889 followed generally the provisions of the above law. It, however, taxed the retail sale of beer as liiglily as that of spirits ; it raised the mininimn amount of the licjuor-dealer's bond from $3,000 to $4,000 ; omitted the re- striction as regards his character ; and required all clubs to i)ay the tax and to close at the appointed hour any room in which li(}uor was kept or distributed. 'I'he number of li(|Uor licences issued in tlie wliole State din-ing several years is shown in the following table, also the ratio of retail h'cences to i)Opulation in 1880 and 1890 : — STATE OK MICmi;AN. i88u. • 885. 1 890. Licences : — GLiicnil : — Wliolcsalc Kciail liccr and wine :— Wholesale Retail Tax paid by retailers : -• ("leiicral IJeer and w ine ... Katio of retail licences lo jjopulaliun 33 1.9-^5 38 2,9" 5 30 2,506 39 i,0oo $ 35^^954 20 i,i'i3 $ 824,014 55 1,67s $ l,iS6,.^i8 ioj,044 1 lo 464 211,940 479. ' 54 I to 500 Mich li, AX, '■^^S The next table gives some statistics for Detroit (population 205,876):— 1005. I 886. 1807. i838. , i8By. 1890. 1891. Arrests -total : -- CommoM drunkard . 8,693 8,720 21 12 10 18 Si 20 j 20' Drunkenness ...12,866 3,768 4,421 3,815 3.45' 3.555 2,816 Keeping saloon open on Sunday I 63 Not paying liquor ! tax 139 Selling to minors... i Number of retail li(|uor-dealers Number of |)olice 26 478 59 209 122 191 3 242 4 1 1 289 ' 8 126 135 222 I 940 I 1,082 1,284 368* The year 1891 shows a large increase of arrests for non- payment of the li(iiior la.\ : hut on the other hand the I'olicc Commissioners rei)orted that only 98 retailers had at the end of that year failed to pay the tax, against 231 at the same date in the i)revious year. Evidently, therefore, the increased number of arrests for this offence was due to a more stringent enforce- ment of the law rather than to an increase of law-breaking. There appears to have been great laxity in the enforcement of the liquor law generally in Detroit, but a recent agitation has resulted in a somewhat more vigorous prosecution of offenders. There is, as I was informed, much abuse of the privilege, allowed to those selling wine and malt liquor only, of paying a reduced tax, spirits being very commonly sold under cover of it. While the prevalence of this evasion of the law is well recognised, no very determined efforts seem to have been made to cope with it ; indeed, the liquor law in Detroit, and perhaps in the State generally, cannot be said to liave been vindicated with much success. Probably the imsettled state of the law, * The I'olice Commissioners, in their report for 1891-2, stated that, in conse(iuence of the insulliciency of the force, there had been an entirely inadequate patrolling of the streets; there were many miles ol .streets on which no |)oliceman was seen night (jr day. 266 .'l.u/iA'/c.LV LinuoR L.iirs. and the legal decisions which have declared some of tlie li(iuor statutes invalid, may have tended to paralyse llie efforts of those who would otherwise have pressed for more vigorous measures. The existence of sn( h a tendency is shown in a report made by the secretary of the Citizens' Law and Order League of the L'nited States to the annual meeting of that hody in Philadelphia in Fei)ruary, iH.S.S, in which he says: — "The (lc( ision of the Supreme Court in Michigan nullified the; existing law to such an extent as to discourage the Law and Order Leagues llial were operating there, and the present Local C)piion Law recently enacted is now hanging upon the decision of cases pending !)■ 'e the Supreme Court, and the Leagues are waiting these d« cisions to know what chances there arc; for successful wo rk." As regards the sale of s[)irits by dealers who have onl) paid the $.^oo tax, it should be noted that (;ne of the < hanges embodied in the abortive law of i (jpulation has been cast by Michigan than l)y any other State. Alissoiiri. 'I'his State has bad a local option law since 1887. The licensing law also embodies to a limited extent the i)rinciple of local option by rei|uiring that every a])plication for a licence should he su[)ported by a certain i)roi)ortion of the inhabitants, amounting, outside the urban communities, to a majority of the taxpayers throughout the whole licensing area — a require- ment which, combined with a high-licence duty, and a general discretionary [)ower of refusal in the licensing authority, has so oi)erated as largely to restrict the number of licences issued. In or about the year 1880 a projiosal was made in the State Legislature to submit to [)0[)ular vote a prohibitory amendment k; the (Constitution, when there v(jted 61 for the proposal and 63 against it, the whole number of members 268 // ,1/ /, A- /' . ; ;V /. II Ufi)u /.All S. \ i; Ijcii)^ about 1.J5. Tlu.- satnc i/ioposal li.is been sul)sc'(|iieiitly renewed and rcd-ived slroi))^ siipporl, but h.is never been adopted. In 1.S.S7 it w.is indeed r.-irrii d in die Mouse, but Tilled, ou'in.L^, as I w;is fold, lo the ;ibsleiilion of ( eri.iin members in tlie Senate. 'I'lu- loe;il option l.iw ua; tli'i) put lot ward and adopted as a ( omproiiiise. 'I'lie li( t'Uee lees wert; raiserl a le^v years a^^o, and it has been proposed still fiirtlier to raise tlieiii. 'i'lie loeal option law is, in (•(("(•' t, as (ollows: - ( )n a|)plieati()ii of one icnlli of tlio vr)t(!is in any iiu 01 poiatcil city or towr) with a po|)iilatioii of 2,500 or more, or of a like proportion in any < oiiiity, ex* liisiv(; of any such ( iiy or town, the local authority is lefpiired to hold an ele(tion to deterniine whether intoxicating liquors shall he s(»l(l in sik h eiiy or town, or county. 'I'he (•!(•( tioii is not to he held within three months of any odier election, if tlie majority is a;^ainst the sale of iiiloxicatin;^f rKjiiors, no one may, in tlie area < ontcrned, (lire( tly or indirr( tjy sell, give aw.iy, 01 barter in any maun(;r whatever any kind of into.\i( ating licjiior or beverage containing ahohol, in any «|iiantily whatever, und'-r penally of a fine of $300 lo .'i)i,o(x>, or imprisonment from bi.\ to twelve; months, or both fine and imprisonment subject to a saving for tin; sale of wine for sar ranu;ntal purposes, and |)urc alcohol for mcdi« inal, art, scienlilic, and nuchanical purposes. After an elet tion has b(;en h(;ld under this law, the (pieslion cannot .again be submitted lo the elet lor.i ft)r four years. 'I'he licetising law is < onlained in a statute passed in 1.S79, as subsetpiently amended in iS.S^, 1S.S5, and i.SSy. No one is allow(;fl to sell inloxiciting li<|iiois in any «(iiantity less than a gallon, without taking out a licence as a diamsho|) keeper. Ap|)lieation for su< h a licence; must Ik; iiKuh; to the County ('ourt, and must b<; sii|)ported by a petition signed, in a < ity (ir towji having a |)opiilation of 2,5o may also be re( uvered. for keeping' a diamshop open, or silling or i^ivin^ any li(|uor, «)n Sunday, llie penalty is a line of $50 to $200 ; the offmder is also to forfeit his licence, and be dis(|uahlie(l for two years. 'I'lui ('ounty (ourt, (»n proof that a diamshop keeper has not at all times kipt an orderly house, is re(|uired to revf)ke his licence, 'ihe County (^ourl is not lo;^rant a licen<:e to any person whose licence has once been revoked, or who has been convicted of any violation of the li<|Uor law, or who has had in his employ any sue h person. Wholesale dealers are forbidden under penally to permit drinkin;.; on the piemis(;s. Any dramslM.|) keeper, dru^^isl, or merchant sellinj,' or giving li(|uc)r to an habitual drunkard, after notice ^iven by a relative or guaidian not to furnish licpior to such person, is liable in clama^'es to the relative or j^uardian to the extent of $50 to .$500, and is to forfeit his licenc e. liy a law |)assed in 1^, a drainbho[) keeper is not to allow the use of any musi( al instrument, nor any c ontesls or exhibitions on hisjprenjises, nor any billianl-table, gaming-table, bowling alley, IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // // V s I/. 4 ^^ wl/.. 1.0 I.I 1.25 IM 2.2 1.8 1-4 ill 1.6 P>. <^ a w '*> o' A ^6 /A y '/ m L

> l)cr I, 1889 1S90 1891 The following figures sliow a considerable iluctuation in the number of inmates of infirmaries at different periods : — 7,667 12,693 7,694 7,576* Illinois. The law of Illinois provides, in the first place, that the local authorities of incorporated cities and villages may " license, regulate, and prohibit " the liquor traffic, subject to the general law of the State. Another statute enables each * Tlicre appears to have been much abuse of outdoor relief in some pans of Ohio. In the city of Cohimbus, for instance, more than 11,000 different persons, or one-eii^hth of the population, are said to have l)een relieved at the public expense in a single year (ending September, 1891), irrespective of relief in the infirmary and by private charity. Great disparity is shown in the administration of outdoor relief, on comparison of returns from different counties. The system is severely criticised in an address delivered by the Rev. Washington Gladden at the State Confer- ence of Charities and Correction in January, 1892. The following passage indicates in an aggravated form the condition of things which produces an inefficient administration of.the li(iuor law {and other laws; in many cities: " I think we come nearer to a true cause of this increase of ihe dependent class in our city when we confront the intolerable laxity with which our city government is administered. It cannot be denied, I think, that the laws for the preservation of order and the suppression of injurious vice are very feebly enforced in Columbus. The gamblers, the lifiuor-sellers, the keepers of the dens of proiligacy have free course. Their nefarious business goes right on twenty- four hours in every day and seven days in every week ; there is no restraint upon them. ... I have no doubt that the enormous excess of outdoor paupers in Columbus is due in a considerable measure to the kind of city government which our citizens seem to prefer. So long as our municipality is organised and re-organised, first in the interest of one political machine, and (hen in the interest of the other, with but secondary and remote reference to responsible and efficient admmistra- tion, so long this stale of things is likely to continue. The si)oilsmen in politics, and they who make a spoil of the poor, work harmoniously to- gether, and the i)eople love to have it so." The partisan management of public charities was also incisively handled in a paper read by Captam Alfred E. Lee at the s:\me conference.. 2 86 American Liquor Laws. county board, as regards so nuich of tliuir county as is not included in an incorporated [)lace, to grant licences on a l)etition from a majority of the voters of the district. The law is thus one of local option, exercisable in the towns by the municipality, and in the rural districts by popular vote. In the latter case tlie option is one to be exercised affirmatively, licences not being issuable until the decision of the majority has been given in favour of their issue. In Chicago, under the city ordinance, licences are granted as of course, on payment of the licence fee, subject only to refusal or revocation for bad character or misconduct. Dis- satisfaction is felt in some quarters that the will of the [jeople cannot be in any way expressed and enforced in the city, as it is in the rural parts of the State, for the purpose of limiting the number and the situation of the dramshops.* The following is a summary of the law : — City Councils and boards of Trustees in villages have power to license, regulate, and prohibit the selling or giving away of intoxi- cating liquor, subject to the general law of the State ; and to punish the selling or giving to minors, insane, drunkards, and intoxicated persons. There is a penalty not exceeding $i,ooo and imprisonment not exceeding one year (one or both) for adulterating liquor intended for drink with cocculus indicus, vitriol, grains of paradise, opium, alum, capsicum, copperas, laurel -water, logwood, brazil-wood, cochineal, sugar of lead, or any other substance which is poisonous or injurious to health. A fine not exceeding $200 is enacted for keeping open on Sunday any place where liquor is sold or given away. Selling on election days is prohibited. Liquor Licensing Act of 1874. — " Dramshop " means a place where liquor is retailed in quantities less than one gallon. For selling without licence the penalty is — fine $20 to $100, or imprisonment ten to thirty days, or both. A local authority is not to grant a licence except on payment • AUcntion was drawn to this point by Mr. C. C. Bonney (President of the International Law and Order League) at the thirteenth annual meeting of the Citizens League of Chicago (1S91). ' i Illinois. 287 i of at least $500; or, for malt liquor only, at least $150; but this does not apply to pharmacists selling for medicinal, mechanical, sacramental, and chemical purposes only. The County Board of each county may grant licences to keep so many dramshops in their county as they may think the public good requires, upon the application, by petition, of a majority of the legal voters of the town, if the county is under township organi- sation ; and, if not under township organisation, then of a majority of the legal voters of the election precinct or district where the same is proposed to be located, and on payment of such sum as the board may rccjuire, not less than $500 per annum (or $150 as the case may be). The board is not to issue a licence in or within two miles of any incorporated city, town, or village in which the corporate authorities have authority to regulate, or in any place where the sale of liquor is prohibited. A person having a beer licence, on conviction of selling other liquor, is liable to fine or imprisonment, or both (and may be pro- ceeded against summarily for the tine), and " a conviction under this section shall forfeit the licence held by the defendant, and the court rendering judgment upon such conviction shall in such judgment declare a forfeiture of such licence." "Any licence may be revoked by the County Board whenever they shall be satisfied that the person licensed has violated any of the' provisions of this Act, or keeps a disorderly or ill-governed house or place of resort for idle or dissolute persons, or allows any illegal gaming in his dramshop, or any house or place adjacent thereto." Every licensee must enter into a l)ond in $3,000 with two sure- ties, being freeholders in the same county, conditioned that he will pay to all persons all damages that they may sustain, either in person or property or means of support, by reason of the licensee selling or giving away intoxicating liquors. Anyone selling or giving liquor to (or procuring it for) a minor without the written order of his parent, guardian, or family phy- sician, or to (or for) any person intoxicated, or in the hab.t of getting intoxicated, is liable to fine and imprisonment. Places where liquor is sold in violation of the Act are declared to be common nuisances. The keeper, on conviction, is subject to fine and imprisonment (twenty to fifiy days ), "and it shall be part of the judgment, upon the conviction of the keeper, that the place so kept shall be shut up and abated until the keeper shall give bond, 288 A.MEKicA.v Liquor Lah^s. with sulhcient security to be approved by the court, in the penal sum of $1000, payable to the people of the State of Illinois, con- ditioned that he will not sell intoxicating; lic|uors contrary to the laws of this State, and will pay all fines, costs, and damages assessed against him for any violation thereof." Every one who by the sale of liquor ciuscs the intoxication ol any person is liable to compensate any person who takes charge of him. Any relation, employer, or other person injured in person, property, or means of sui)port by any intoxicated jierson, or in con- sec|uence of the intoxication, habitual or otherwise, of any person, has a right of action against any person who wholly or partly caused such intoxication by selling or giving liquor. If the damages claimed do not exceed $200, proceedings for their recovery may be taken before a magistrate. The penalty for drunkenness is a fine not exceeding $5, and, on subsecjuent conviction, not exceeding $25. The justice of the peace may remit the fine in whole or in part if satisfied that the public welfare and the good of the offender require it. Common drunkards are deemed vagabonds, and may be imprisoned from ten days to six months. Habitual drunkenness for two years is a cause for divorce. When a person by excessive drinking, gaming, idleness or debauchery, so wastes his estate as to expose himself oi- his family to want or suffering, or any local authority to expense for his suppoit, proceedings may betaken, as in the case of insanity, for the appointment of a conservator, who is given the management of his property, the custody of hi? person, and, if necessary, the custody and education of his children. The ordinances of the city of Chicago make provision for the licensing of dramshops. Licences are required to be granted by the mayor to persons furnishing satisfactory evidence of good character, and entering into a bond of $500 with two sureties, to observe the ordinances, and keep closed on Sunday all doors opening on the street. The licence fee is $500. A separate beer licence at $150 has been abolished. Licences arc not to be granted in any prohibitoi/ area which becomes annexed to the city. Any licence may be revoked by the mayor when he is satisfied Illixois. •89 that the licensee has violated any city ordinance or any ronditicin of his bond. The punishment for selling without Hcence is fine from $20 to $roo. Licensed premises are required to be closed from midnight to five a.m. Druggists are recjuircd to take out a permit to enable them to sell liquor for medicine, etc., and must reco-d all sales (except on a doctor's prescription). The relative of a drunkard may give notice to saloon-keepers not to supply him. Sales to minors, drunkards, and intoxicated persons are prohibited ; and any minor, drunkard, or intoxicated person wh :> seeks to obtain drink is liable to a fine. On complaint by two or more persons that a saloon is a resort of disreputable persons, the mayor is required to investigate the complaint, and, if true, to revoke the licence. On a report to the same effect from the police department, he must at once revoke the licence. One per cent, of the licence fees is given to the police and firemen's relief fund. Ten per cent, goes to the Washingtonian Home of Chicago. In recent years the licence fees in Chicago inve twice been raised — from $52 to $103, and from $ro3 to $500 with the result in each case of a certain diminution in the number of licences issued ; and it has been claimed that the raising of the fees did much to remove " the pe.st of the home, the bar in the family grocery," and to weaken the position of the saloon in politics. The $500 fee was charged in pursuance of an Act of the State Legislature, known as the " Hari)er High-Licence Law,' which was passed in 1883. In the following year a T5ill for again reducing the fee was reported by the Committee on Licence, but was afterwards dropped. A minority report, made by three members of the committee, of whom Mr. Harper, the author of the High-Licence Law, was one, contained the following passage : — "The advantages and pecuniary benefits of this " {i.e., the hioh- licence) ''law are not only wondertul, but almost incalculable. In 7C)0 Americax Tjqvok Laws. the city of Chicago the revenue arising therefrom has been in- ( reased from $2oo,(X>o to .$1,750,000, and the city has rctluced the numher of saloons from 3,800 to 3,600, or 200 less, while the popu lation has increasetl from 450,000 to 700,000, and has added to the police force 300 men. In Hyde Park, a suburb of Chicago, two years ago, 214 saloons paid $1 1,000, and since this law has been in operation the saloons have been reduced nearly one half, while the population has largely increased, and the revenue from 127 saloons is $71,000, nearly tenfold more ; and the number of arrests for the two years prior to the passage of this law was 1,895 as against 678 arrests since. "In Springfield (the capital city\ the number of saloons has been reduced from 157 to 104, closing up 53 (or 33 per cent.), while the revenue has been increased front $15,700 to $52,000, an increase of $36,300, or 231 per cent., notwithstanding the reduction of saloons and the increase of population of the capital city. " In Peoria, before this law went into cftect, there were 220 saloons, paying a revenue of $22,000 ; and since then, with an increased population, and about half the number of saloons — say 126 — the city receives $63,000, or nearly thrice as much as hereto- fore, and the number of arrests have been 194 less than before this law was enacted." ) I In the same report the number of saloons throughout the State was said to have been reduced from 13,000 to 9,000, while the advantages of a revenue raised from $700,000 to $4,500,000 were dwelt on. It will appear, however, from the following table that, so Year, Niiiiiber of Saloons in Ciiicngo. 1 Revenue. — - Dols. 1880 ... 3,245 (licence fee $52) 168,740 1881 ... 3.603 „ 182,226 1882 ... 3-919 M 195,490 1883 ... 3,777 (licence fee $103) 385.864 1884 ... 3,184 (licence fee $500) 1,463,700 1885 ... 3-075 M 1,721,474 1887 ... 3.600 „ , . . 1890 .. 5.500 „ Irj.ixois. •91 far as Chicago, at least, is concerned, the actual limitation in llic number of saloons was not very considerable ; and, after all due allowance made for increase of po[)ulation, the number in 1892 was very great — about 7,oow. "The Citizens' League of Chicago for the Sui)[)ression of the Sale of Liquor to Minors," incorporated in 1878, limits its operation to the enforcement of the law which forbids the sale of liquor to minors or to drunkards. It does not under- take the prosecution of oflenders against the Sunday-closing law, nor does it identify itself with any political organisation, or, as a rule, take part in any movement for legislative inter- ference with the liquor trade. The agents of the I^eague are instructed to receive complaints, collect testimony, and prose- cute the cases openly in the courts. They seek out violations of the law by visiting the saloons, and are in daily attendance at all the police-courts in the city for the purpose of investi- gating every case where a minor or a drunkard is brought up for intoxication, and taking proceedings against those who supplied the liquor. As the result of the League's efforts, it is claimed that there are fewer boys and girls to be found in the saloons of Chicago in proportion to its population than can be found in those of any other city in the world where liquor saloons are licensed. The magistrates and police are in full sympathy with the movement. Complaint, however, has been made in some of the annual reports of the League that the grand jury and the municipal authorities had not lent it the support which it was entitled to expect. Licences have been granted to unworthy persons, and have not been revoked when good and sufficient reasons for their revocation have been presented ; and grand juries, consisting largely of saloon keepers and ward politicians, have refused to indict their brethren.* At the time when the League commenced its operations * For several years, it is said, there were from three to seven saloon keepers on each grand jury, and few indictments could be obtained. T 2 292 Amrricax LfQUOR Laws. the 1 i\v forbidding the sale of liijuor to minors wis a dead letter in (Chicago, Cliildren were freely admitted to the saloons ; and at the same time, and, it is thought, largely in consequence of tiiis abuse, there was a great deal of juvenile crime. The efforts of the League have, it is claimed, had a marked effect in diminishing this evil. 'I'he figures following, however, show a large progressive increase so far as arrests are concerned, though it is necessary to make due allowance for the vast increase of population, which in 1880 was, according to the census, 503,000, while in 1890 it had risen to r, 100,000 : — , 1877. i 1885. 1886. 1887. 1888. 1889. 1S90. 1891. Number of minors ar- rested for all ofl-ences g^gjg Cases prose- , 6,550 6,841 7,539 8,923 9,330 11.093 13.u1 cuted by Citizen's League 1,287 2,042 1,973 1,961 1,649 1,772 1,306 The refusal of licences in Chicago to persons of bad character rests at the mayor's discretion. Some mayors have exercised their power with firmness, and have been willing to give ear to representations made to them by citizens and by bodies such as the Citizens' League. Under other adminis- trations the weeding process has but partially been applied. The League, in their report for 1888, state that high- licence has greatly aided their work, by reducing the number of saloons. They urge that the licence fee should be further increased from $500 to $1,000, but express the opinion that a still more effective limitation would be a statutory restriction on the number of saloons to one for each five hundred inhabitants. It does not, however, appear that any active movement has been undertaken for securing such a reform, and the i M I I , 1 u Illinois. 293 political inauence of the trade would undoubtedly be power- fully exerted against it. The following figures are taken from the annual police rei)orts of Chicago : — Cili' At;o niopulalion, i,09<).S'5o). Arrests for disorderly conduct (includins drunk, and drunk ami disorderly) ... Arrests for \iolalion of saloon ordinance Total arrests Intoxicated persons assisted home Total number of liolice force 1883. 1884. ; 1S85. 4" 37,187 673 637 23,080 25,407 1886. 1887. ; 1888. \ 18H9. 26,067' -'7.632' 3', 1641 27.536 iP'/i. iH9'- 37,o6j 4J.463 146 192 535 39,434' 40.998 44.-'Oi 727; 849 570 46,505 381 50,432 733 1.336 1.260 924' 924 1,032 1,145 I 255 48,119 i,4'7 1,624 62,230 70,550 1,951 2,201 1,900' 2,306* In 18S3, the number of arrests for drunkenness alone was 2,355, "^^^'^ ^'•^'" '^^'"» ^'■^^'"'^ ^'''^^ disorderly 843. In subse- quent years the figures for these offences are not given separately; but judging from the returns of 1883, it would seem that drunkenness was probably charged in a compara- tively small minority only of the cases included in the category of " disorderly conduct." The Citizens' League of ihc town of Lake, which was annexed in 1889 to Chicago, appears to have laboured on broader lines than the Chicago League, and to have had remarkable success in diminishing the evils of drink. Lake is a comparatively small town, but one which has had a very rapid development, as appears from th e following statement :— I 1881. i 1885. Population Number of saloons 23,0c.- 265 60,000 201 * The total cost of the police in 1891 was $2,622,000. 2 94 American Liquor Laws. Owing to the efforts of the League the numl)er of saloons was actually diminished, notwithstanding the ininiensc increase of iKjpulation ; and a steady improvement is shown by the following figures of arrests for drunkenness, and for being drunk and disorderly : — iSSi 18S2 1883 1S84 1S85 620 500 420 400 Vagrancy showed a like steady decline. I was not able to obtain definite information from official sources regarding the extent to which the Local Option Law has operated in a prohibitory sense ; nor were the anti-liquor organisations able to supply this information in detail. There are, as I am informed, a mmiber of counties, especially in the southern part of the State, which have no saloons in the rural parts, and also a number of counties in which nearly all the towns have voted against licence. An investigation undertaken by the Chnstian Union in 1885 — 6, for the puri)ose of com[)aring the effects of high licence and local option in Illinois with those of prohibition in Iowa, showed that, of seventy-six towns in Illinois from which answers to inquiries were received, twenty-six were under pro- hibition, the largest of these being Canton, credited by the census of 1890 with a i)opulation of 5,600, Oak Park (4,770), and Sandwich (2,500). Seme other towns, including Jackson- ville (12,900), Rockford (23,500). and Streator (11,400), after shutting up their saloons for a time, had reverted to licence.* While a certain number of small towns have thus pro- hibited the sale of liquor, it does not appear that local prohibi- tion has taken firm root in the State to any very widespread extent, or that general public attention is much directed to its * Christian Union (New York), January 14th, 1886. lk'/SCOXS7X. ■95 jon.s pase the ping further (levt'lopmcnl. Outside the riiial tlLsliicts :ind a hmitcd number of small towns, it has had little or no success. Other places have gone beyond the minimum re(iiiireiiKnls of the Har[)cr Law in the direction of high-licence. In a gocxl many towns, even before the passage of tiiat law, the fee was $500 ; and at the i)resent time it is by no means uncomuKjn to charge $1,000, a course which, whatever effect it may have on the amount of drunkenness (as to which opinions often differ, and the experience of different places does not seem to be uniform), has in the grea. majority of cases, if not always, reduced the number of licensed retailers. Galesburg and I'Mwardsville may be mentioned as instances of towns in Illinois having a $1,000 licence fee. A few towns are, by their charters of incori)oration, pro- hibited from issuing licences. In one case, that of I'Aanslon, near Chicago, founded as the site of a college endowed by private munificence, no saloon may be opened within four miles of the college building. An attempt made in the legis- lative session of 1893 to obtain the re[)eal of this restriction was defeated. IVisconsin. J>ocal option has been in force in this State since 1889. An attempt to make the county the area of adoption was defeated, and the law as it stands gives to each municipality and township the right of deciding the ([uestion for itself.* A peculiarity of the law in Wisconsin is its extension of the principle of local option to the question of the amount of the licence fee to be paid in each locality in which licences are granted. The law fixes a minimum fee, and authorises a popular vote to be taken on the proposal to increase the amount within certain limits ; " high-licence " b ing thus made conditional to local option. * A V>\\\ to repeal the local option lav. was in 1893 defeated in the House, 38 to 34. 196 AMhRIC.iy L/QUOK L.UFS. Town boards, village boards, and common councils, of towns, \ illages, and cities, niay <;rant licences (subject to the general law of the State) to such persons as they deem proper to keep groceries, saloons, or other places for the retail sale of liquor to be consumed on the premises. The annual fee for retail on-licences is to be not less than $100 in purely rural districts, and elsewhere not less than $200 ; but the $100 licence may by popular vote, taken on the requisition of twelve voters, be raised to $250 or $400, and the $200 licence may in like manner be incrci.sed to $350 or $500. The fee for off licences (covering sale in any c|uantity) is $2 .)o ; but this law does not a))ply to brewers or manufacturers selling in packages or casks, according to the custom of the trade. Pharmacists, also, on payment of a $10 fee, may be permitted to sell liquor in (-luantities less than a gallon, for medicinal, mechanical, or scientific purposes only. A i)harinacist to whom such a permit is refused may sell for medicinal purposes only, on a medical pre- scription. Pharmacists are required to keep a record of all sales of intoxicating liquor. The licence fees are appropria'.ed for the support of the poor. K\ery applicant for a licence must enter into a bond for his good behaviour, in the sum of $500, with t^vo sureties being freeholders and residents of the same county. The penalty for sale of liquor without a licence or permit is a fine from $50 to $100, or imprisonment not exceeding six months nor less than three months. Places where liquor is unlawfully sold are declared public nuisances, and, on conviction of the keeper, may be shut up. Justices of the peace, municipal officers, and constables, on being credibly informed of any offence against the lic|uor law, are required to take proceedings against the offender, on penalty of a fine of $25. When any person shall by excessive drinking of intoxicating liquors misspend, waste, or lessen his estate, so as to expose him- self or family to want, or the town, city, village, or county to which he belongs to liability for the support of himself or family, or so as thereby to injure his health, endanger the loss thereof, or to endanger the personal safety and comfort of his family, or any member thereof, his wife, or the municipal or Poor Law authorities may give notice forbidding the sale to him of any intoxicating liquor for a year. The notice may extend to places outside of that in which the person resides, and may be renewed from year to law lies. .1 IJ'/SCCKXS/A^. 297 year. The penalty is a fine of $50 for each offence ; and a person concerning whom the notice is given may be arrested and made to declare from whom he has received liquor. There is also a right of action for damages on the part of anyone injured in person, property, or means of support, through the intoxication of any such person. Selling to minors, or intoxicated persons, or within a mile of a hospital for the insane, is punishable as a misdemeanor. Upon sworn complaint that a licence-holder has violated the law, the licensing authority must summon the person charged, hear the evidence, and on ])roof of the offence, the licence is to be revoked ; nor may the same person again be licensed for twelve months. Any person found in any public place in such a state of intoxication as to disturb others, or unable by reason of his con- dition to care for his own safety or the safety of others, shall upon conviction thereof be punished by a fine not exceeding $10, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than five days, or by both such fine and imprisonment ; but this section shall not abridge the powers of cities and villages to provide a different mode of punishment for such offences. The sale of liquor on Sunday, or on the day of the annual town meeting or the annual election, is a misdemeanor punisiiable by fine from $5 to $25, or imprisonment not exceeding thirty days or both fine and imprisonment. The sale of lic[uor to Indians, "except civilised persons of Indian descent not members of any tribe," is forbidden. Instruction is rec[uired to be given in all schools supported by public money, or under State control, in physiology and hygiene, with special reference to the effects of siimulanis and narcotics on the human system. The local option law provides for a vote being taken for any town, village, or city, on the application of any number of voters e(|rial to 10 per cent, of the number of votes cast at the last general election for (Governor. If the majority is "against licence," no person is to "vend, sell, deal, or traffic in any spirituous, malt, or intoxicating liquors or drinks in any quantity whatever " in the town, village, or city, and no licence for such sale is to be issued therein. If any person should vend, etc., " or for the purpose of evading any law of this State give away any spirituous, malt, ardent, or intoxicating liquors or drink'' in any place which has carried a •98 American Liquor Laiis. prohibitory vote, his punishment is a tine from $50 to $100 and costs, or imprisonment from three to six months ; and on a subse- quent conviction within the year both fine and imprisonment. If the majority is " for licence," the Board of Supervisors of the town, or the village trustees or board of the village, or the mayor of the city (as the case may be) may grant licences according to the law of '1885. There is a general saving for druggists, in accordance with the law of 1887. Tlic local o])tion law has resulted in prohibition being voted in a considerable number of rural districts, and in some of the smaller towns, as, for example, in Beloit (population 5,000), a manufacturing and college town; Sparta (3,000); Viroqua ; and Lancaster. In Whitewater (3,000) an unsuccessful attempt was made to carry an anti-li(|Uor vote. Evansville (2,000), I am told, has never had a saloon, legal or illegal ; it was settled by a colony of Methodists, and before the days of local option, officers were always elected who refused to grant licences. Many smaller places, especially farming communities in the western and southern parts of the State, have made ase of the Act. The east, where the German element is strong, and the north, where a new lumbering and mining section has been opened, are generally in favour of liquor ; and the moral con- dition of certain towns in the north is said to be bad, liquor being sold in houses of prostitution, and political influence being too often gathered about such i)laces. ^Visconsin has a greater number of foreign immigrants in proportion to its population than any other State in the Union. A large number of these are Germans, all beer-drinkers, though there is not much drunkenness among them, and all opposed to legal restrictions on the trade. Many Scandinavians also (esi)ecially Norwegians and Danes) find a home here. The men of this race drink hard liquor, many of them drink pure alcohol, which they procure at the drug stores. There is a good deal of drunkenness among them ; but, in spite of, or Wisconsin. !99 perhaps rather because of, this, some of them adopt advanced anti-Hquor views, and join the cause of prohibition. Apart from their drinking habits, tlie Scandinavian immigrants form a good class of citizens, assimilating themselves to American ideas and institutions more readily, perhaps, than those of any other foreign-speaking race. The Irish are whisky-drinkers ; there is a "temperance" section among them, which, however, does not usually advocate general prohibition, but is flivourable to local option. There are many— about 7,000— Indians in AVisconsin, as many as existed before the State was settled. They live partly in reservations which are under the Federal Govern- ment ; but some are made full citizens, and then come under the State law. The German influence has made itself strongly felt in this State in the social habits of the people. A resident who has given long attention to the subject expressed to me his belief that theie is now considerably less drinking of hard liquor than was practised forty years ago. The German has come and set up his brewery and his beer garden, and has introduced the habit of drinking beer among the native Americans. The con- sumption of beer has without doubt much increased. Mil- waukee is one of the chief centres of brewing in the country. The Germans, however, as already stated, do not often get di unk on their beer ; and they do not commit crime due to drink, though some say that they are apt to injure their health, and contract organic diseases in middle life. I have, indeed, heard it said that more actual drunkenness exists among the Germans than is commonly supposed, and that many of them, though not as a rule much inclined to speak out, admit the magnitude of the evil, and would at heart gladly welcome restrictive legislation. I did not, however, find evidence of any extensive prevalence of this view among them. The clergy, both Scandinavian and German, are active in the temperance cause. 300 American Liquor Laivs The importance of the Ijrewing interest lias led to an extensive introduction of the " tied house " system, and the brewer is commonly a surety on the bond of the saloon- keeper. The liquor laws are not generally, it is said, very well enforced in this State ; But I have no detailed information respecting Milwaukee, the largest town, having a population of over 200,000, In Madison, the official capital of the State, a small town of nearly 15,000 inhabitants, 75 licjuor licences are issued. No application is refused, except for misconduct, i.e., for misconduct other than the mere breach of regulations, which is general, the law being slackly enforced. Neither in Madison nor in Milwaukee has the option of increasing the minimum licence fee fixed by law been exercised. In Madison, for a time, owing to great exertions on the ])art of the Law and Order League, led by a small band of active prohibitionists, Sunday closing and other regulations were made effective, 'io attain this end, cases were fought with determination through the courts.* Witnesses were [)ro- secuted for perjury, and convictions were secured by an extensive exercise of the right to challenge jurors, till at last the licjuor men surrendered ; they came in and undertook to obey the law if they might be let alone. For a time they kept their word pretty well, till the vigilance of the League abated. The vindication of the law had not been obtained without much friction. Detectives employed by the League were mol)bed and threatened ; and many threatening letters were received by the most prominent of its representatives. Though successful for the time, the League soon began to lose ground. * It is worth noting tliat Wisconsin lias abolished the grand jury as part of the ordinary machinery of the criminal law. Cases are sent direct to the petty jury for trial by information of the district attorney, or by the magistrate aftera preliminary hearing. (Ireat power is given to the district • attorney by this system, a power which doubtless is open to abuse ; but it a]-)pears to be gencially thought that on the whole the discontinuance of the grand juiy system has proved advantageous. 1 JF/scoNs/x. 30 1 i fi Mnny of those who at first had given it their support did not care to face the odium which fell upon the movement. Even those who had been most prominent in advocating the work held back when they found what a storm they had raised ; and the growing feeling that the proper officers are paid to enforce the laws, and that it is not the business of private citizens to contribute their money for enforcing them through \mycite agents, checked the flow of subscriptions. The long and short of the matter was that the League, having for a while been victorious through the efforts of a few men, and having encountereii an angry resistance which only a few cared to face, collai)sed ; and the movement at last came to nothing. One who had taken his full share in the fight, and was himself a thorough-going prohibitionist, expressed to me his conviction that it was useless in the long run for a body of private citizens to band themselves together for the enforcement of a law to which there is much opposition. Such action always creates very great friction, and those who embark on it are sure to have the regular officials against them. On my suggestion that in this case it was impossible to enforce such a law at all, seeing that the appointed officers seemed almost invariably to fail in makin^ it effective, his answer was that this failure was incidental to the general demoralisation of local politics, the great evil with which Americans had to grapple and were grappling. The liquor interest was powerful in the management of the political machine. When the machine was broken up or reformed, and the Government came to be really controlled l)y the majority, he believed that the administration of the liquor law (even the most prohibitory form of it) would succetd, though the struggle at first would be keen and bitter. x\t the time of my visit there was, according to the statement made to me by observers of political and social tendencies, and by prohibitionists themselves, no active movement in this State for any strong anti-liquor reform. The prohibitionist strength appears to remain about stationary ; indeed, the highest I 302 American Liquor Laws. I : l)r()liil)ition vote ever cast was in t886. Then' exists, ai)parciUly, a general acquiescence with the law as it is ; and it is recog- nised by [M'ohihitionists that local option is the most they can expect (for the i)resenl, at all events) in Wisconsin. 'I'hey would, however, prefer to make the county the unit for voting instead (;l" the smaller area. Prohibitionists in this State are to some extent out of sympathy with that section of their i)arty in the country at large which is in close relationship with the Women's Christian 'rem))erancc Union, in consequence of the association of the female suffrage with the anti-liquor movement, a combination which many prohibitionists in Wisconsin disapprove. And while on the one side this cause of discouragement exists, a prominent leader of the anti-licjuor movement told me that he had no belief in its advancement by either of the two great political parties. Though the Republicans have in the North been regarded as the o})ponents, and the Democrats as the friends, of the liquor interest, in the South the positions are reversed ; the truth being that, so far as the North is concerned, the Republicans have merely been more successful than their rivals in bidding for prohibitionist support, and are not as ^ party really hostile to liquor. The civil damage law is rendered inoperative, or nearly so, by the requirement of a previous notice in each case to li(luor-sellers forbidding them to sell. It is a hard matter for a i)oor woman in Madison (for example) to draw up 70 or 80 notices, and then to serve them on all the bar-keepers, warning them not to supply drink to her husband. This restriction is the result of a recent amendment to the Act, which originally had a civil damage provision in general terms. I was told that opium-taking was to some extent prevalent in Wisconsin, especially among women. It is practised very secretly, and the actual extent of it cannot be determined. The existence of the evil was recognised by the State Legislature ■ ft-iKn^/w'M Wisconsin: 303 in 189T, when an Act was ]iasse(l proliibitint; the sale of opium e\ce]:)t on a physician's certificate. '!1ic passing of the " Temperance Inslriiction I/iw'' was the occasion of a warm dispute ; some who had taken an active part in securing the passage of the law advocating the adoi^ion of a text-book of a pronounced prohibitionist tendency. Other counsels, however, prevailed. The law requires that the book should be approved by the State Board of Health ; and a physiology i)rimer of a more general 'character was at last selected. ill 304 CHAPTER XVI. COr.ORAIiO AND t'AI.lFORNMA. Colorado. The liquor legislation of this State contains little that calls for special notice. In two of its municipalities, however — Greeley and Colorado Springs- by virtue of clauses in the title deeds on which the land is held, no saloons are allowed to be licensed. Colorado Springs, now a city of over 10,000 inhabitants, was founded not many years ago by a company from the East, which bought up a quantity of land and laid it out in town i)lots, stipulating in every conveyance for building purposes that no intoxicating licjuor should be sold on the premises. The object — the main object, at all events — which dictated this exclusion of the dramshop, was not the enforcement of abstinence from drink on general temperance grounds, but the preservation of the place from those classes which freiiuent saloons, and especially the ** tough " element from the mining camps. The ])lace vas from the first designed to attract, as residents, the higher classes of society. In the result, the objects of the company have been well attained. It is a small city of wealthy and well-to-do people — many of whom have been attracted thither by considerations of health — with retail shops, but no large manufl^ctories, and little to attract the rowdy portions of society. These results are in a great measure attributed to the absence of the saloon. In every deed of conveyance from the company to the purchaser a clause was inserted for the reversion of the property to the company, in the event of the sale of liquor being permitted on it. Only druggists had the right of selling in quantities not less than a quart for medicinal and mechanical purposes. Smaller quantities may 1 1 Colorado. 305 only be obtained on the prescription 01 a physician. I'he vahdity of the prohibitory clause has been tested in the law courts, in the case of a house-owner who was sued for forfeiture of his property for having undertaken to sell licjuor ; and in the result the forfeituio was upheld. In connection with the hotel, the question arose whether the prohibitory clause was to be enforced to the extent of preventing the supply of wine, etc., to guests, and it was ultimately agreed that tliis should not be interfered with. Hut there is no bar. A similar question arose at the club. The liability to forfeiture caused some difficulty in raising money on mortgage, to meet which the company agreed that in case of forfeiture the rights of mortgagees up to half the value of the property should be allowed to stand. Druggists, as a matter of fact, sell unre- strictedly, in quantities of a quart and ui)wards, under colour vi the medicinal and mechanical saving ; and the practice is acquiesced in. To some extent, doubtless, they go beyond this, and allow dram-drinking in their shops ; but it seems that this evasion of the law does not go on to any great extent ; and, practically, drinking on the premises may be said to be almost excluded from Colorado Springs. Colorado Cit\-, lying just outside the limits of the Springs, has no lack of saloons. In Greeley, I understand that the legal restrictions are similar, but that less relaxation is allowed. The general licensing law of Colorado provides as follows : — The licensing authority is in cities the City Council, in incor- porated towns the Board of Trustees, and elsewhere the Board of County Commissioner?. In cities or towns the Council or Board of Trustees has "the exclusive right to license, regulate, or prohibit the selling or giving away of any intoxicating, malt, vinous, mixed, or fermented licjuor within the limits of the city or town, or within one mile beyond the outer boundaries thereof, except where the boundaries of two citit s or towns adjoin, the licence not to extend beyond the municip.d U 3o6 American Liquor Laii^s, year in which it shall be granted, and to determine the amount to be paid for such licence." The retail licence fee, however, must not be less than $600 in cities, $500 in incorporated towns, and elsewhere $300. Where the County Commissioners are the licensing; authority, tlicy have power to " ^^rant licences to keep saloons, iiotels, public- houses, or groceries," and a saloon or grocery is defined to include all places where spirituous or vinous Hc[uors are sold by quantities less than one quart. The board may reject or grant an application in their discretion, and on compl.iint made to them may revoke a saloon or grocery licence, if satisfied that privileges granted have been abused, or that the licensee has violated the law. In every case the applicant, before receiving his licence, must execute a bond in not less than $2,000 with two good and sufficient sureties of the county. The validity of the licence is limited to twelve months. The licensing authorities may, in their discretion, grant licences for malt liquors only, on payment of half the fee. There is a civil damage clause, limited to the case of habitual drunkards, after notice not to sell. The general law enacts the following penalties : — For selling liquor in quantities less than a quart without a licence, a fine of $50 to $200. For procuring intoxicating liquor of any kind for an habitual drunkard, a fine of $100 to $300, or imprisonment 3 to 12 months, or both. For selling to United States troops, or State militia, except as ordered by the officers under the direction of the War Department imprisonment for 3 months or fine of $50, together with forfeiture of licence. For selling between sunrise and sunset on an election day, a fine of $10 to $100 for the first, and $50 to $200 for a Subsequent offence. Permitting a minor or habitual drunkard to frequent a saloon, or to drink (unless the minor be accompanied by his parent or guardian), a fine of $5 to $50, and, on a second offence, forfeiture of licence and disqualification for six months. A minor or habitual drunkard found in a saloon is also to be fined. Every taver.-i-keeper, or other retailer of spirits, who sells spirits to a common drunkard, and every person who sells spirits to an Indian, is to be fined $50. Colorado. 307 amount to m $600 in authority, :1s, jjublic- to include ([uantitit's pplication ^ revoke a intcd have ;ncc, must sufficient limited to It licences f habitual without a 1 habitual 2 months, except as partment forfeiture on day, a . ibscquent a saloon, jarent or forfeiture • habitual lis spirits its to an Sheriffs and constables are required to arrest all persons found violating the law respecting minors or habitual drunkards, and saloon-kec|)ers are to post up conspicuously the words, " Xo minor or habitual drunkard allowed hero." Under the ordinances of the city of I)en\ er, the fine for drunken- ness in a jHiblic place is $1 to $25, and it is made the duly of the police to arrest offenders and keep them in custoily until sober, unless they are taken charge of by relatives or friends. Additional penalties are also imposed for selling w ithout a licence. By an ordinance passed in 1892, an ai)plication for a new licence .as to be accompanied by a petition from a majorit)- of the frontagers in the same block. If the premises are at the corner, there must be a majority along both fronts. This requirement, however, does not extend to the annual or half-yearly renewals. No licence can be given for premises within 500 feet of a public school. The same ordinance provides that liquor is not to be supplied to females, nor may females be permitted to be in saloons or dram- shops for the purpose of drinking, or be employed in the liquor business. At the beginning of the present year there were about 600 licences ("on" an^ "off'') in Denver, all i)aying the $600 fee ; no beer licences had been issued. I was informed by a prohibitionist in Denver that the law was not very actively enforced there. The requirement, however, that the majority in a block must as.sent to the grant of a licence in the block, acts as a check to the grant of licences to disorderly persons ; but it seems also to have the effect of relieving the licensing authority, to some extent, of their sense of responsibility in this respect. As regards the exercise of the licensing power in the State generally, the same informant told me that the County Com- missioners were sometimes elected on the prohibition issue. He mentioned two or three counties where no licences were issueil by the commissioners, and he thought there might be a few others in the eastern part of the State, the farming region. Colorado, however, is a mining State, and the mining community does not in general favour total abstinence, u 2 lo8 .•i,i//;A'/c./.v L/{)i/oA' Lilt's. Calijonua. Under tlic constitution of California, any county, city, losvn, or township may make a!id cnfort-c within its limits all such local police, sanitary, and other reLi,ulalions as are not ill conllict with general laws (Art. xi. s. ii). The effect of this is to give to every manici[)ality and every area of local ailministralion home rule in dealing with tlie licjuor trattlc. Cases have been taken through the courts testing the validity of i)articular ordinances and regulations ; but it is now well understood that each local authority has power to make su' !'. arrangements as it may think fit, regulating, restricting, or entirely [)rohibiting the sale of liiiMor within the area which it controls. California has thus wo general licjuc^r laws, and it is not Ijosiible here to enter into any extended examination of the methods of [)rocedure adopted by the various localities throughout the State. The position of California is, of course, peculiar among American .States, since it is the only one in which wine is manufactured on a really extensive scale. In 1889 this State l)rodu(ed nearly 15,000,000 gallons of wine out of a total production in the United States of less than 25,000,000 gallons. According to the statements in the national census of 1 890, there is an established home demand for Californian wine to the amount of j, 000,000 gallons a month, and there were exported in 1889 about 312,000 gallons, valued at $217,000. An increasing quantity is shipped to France, where it is transformed into " French " wine ; and much of it returns in that character to the United States. Viticulture, it is said, promises to increase in the near future. In 1889 California contained 155,000 acres of bearing and 45,000 acres of non-bearing vines, grapes being raised for the table, for raisins, and for wine. I ■ Ik'- Cal/forxia. 301) The city ordinances of San I'Vancisco provide as follows :— (( >inuy, city, its limits ons as arc The effect 0' 'ii'ea of t'le licjuor L'sting the it is now 1" to niaIy ortlcr No. 1587, " ]irohibiting offcnsi\c trades, occupations, and nuisances, and defining misdemeanors," it is provided that no person shall be drunk in a public phice or place open to public view ; or be on any public highway or in any public place in a state of drunkenness ox intoxication, or be on any private premises or in ariy private house in a state of drunkenness or intoxication to the annoyance of any other person. .And the penalty for breach of any of the numerous provisions o*" this order is a fine not exceed- ing $1,000, or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both. Under a general law enacted in 1890, no liquor may be sold or given to a minor under 18 years. No niinor may be permitted to enter a saloon or public place where liquors are sold, under penalty of a fine of $100 to $300. The effect of these ordinances is to fix the annual licence fee for saloons in San Francisco at $84, since but few licences are taken out on the higher scale of $41 a quarter. The number of saloons is very great, in 1890 about 3,100, or a ratio of one saloon to 9^ inhabitants, a higher ratio i)rol)ably than in any other city in the country. In 1892, 13,455 quarterly retail liquor licences were issued, whence it woidd appear that the number of li(}uor shojjs had grown to about 3,350, but according to the police report the number on the * Ordoi No. 1587, as amended by Order No. 1785 (September 26, 1884). Calirirnia. .•» II •ant oi- of the licence led by rartice, Jacked 30th of June, 1892, was 3,192. This superabundance of dramshops, together with the more tlian doubtful character of many of their ])roprietors, has given rise to much dissatisfac- tion : and a movement has arisen, hitherto unsuccessful, fpr a reform in the direction of an increased licence fee, and a diminution in the number of licences. A petition, said to have been signed by nearly 1,200 of the eading business men of the town, was presented in 1886 to the Board of Supervisors, urging that no licences should be issued to any person of bad character, and that the fees should be fixed at $r,ooo for the retail sale of liquors generally, and $500 for wine and beer. 'I'his petition was actively supported by the Society for the Sujipression of Vice in an address to the citizens of San Francisco, drawing attention to the increase of crime and suicide, and the demoralisation due to the exces- sive consumption of liquor. A body of citizens, organised under the title of the High Licence Association, have advocated a licence tax of $600, and estimated that its effect would be to reduce the number to about 1,500 (which would still leave the ratio of saloons to j)opulation pretty high), while it would at the same time increase the revenue by more than $600,000, and reduce the city expenses in connection with crime, police, and pauperism, by at least $100,000. The advocates of reform further hoped that the City Legislature would impose such other restrictions as good government and good morals demanded, foremost among which restrictions was mentioned the separation of the saloon business from the groceries. In regard to these "corner groceries," it is urged that they " are the most active and successful in the work of making drunkards and destroying homes ; in them boys and girls are taught to drink ; ser\ants are bribed with drink, and the wife of many a mechanic and labourer is by them supplied with liquor, which is charged in the family account as ' fiour,' ' sugar,' etc. ; and here many a ! ' ' ! \l < Ml ;i2 American Liquor Laws. working man, calling to settle a family bill, is deluded into a game of cards and whiskied or heered up until the cunning j)roprietor has secured the whole or a considerable portion of the hard earnings that should, and otherwise would, have been applied to the purchase of additional necessaries or comforts for the family, or laid by for some rainy day. It may be accepted as a fact that the worst enemy of the working man and his family — the enemy that keeps him and his family in l)0verty and interj)oses the greatest obstacle to his prosperity — is the corner grocery bar." Still more recently the grand jury of the (nty and county of San Francisco, in their published report upon the various departments of the City Ciovcrnment, dated December 21st, 1892, make the following observations : — " We also recommend that the licence on the sale of liquor should be increased from $21 per quarter to $51. This is too moderate an increase to be called a high-licence, but is suggested as an experiment in that direction. It is the opinion of the jury that a much higher licence would be advantageous in every way. The chief of police favours high-licence as an effective help to his department in the suppression of crime. He believes it would result in closing up many of the worst places in the city. Its results elsewhere justify this belief. "The licence collector reports 13,435 quarterly retail liquor licences issued during the year. Of these 3,600 were for the com- bined sale of groceries and retailing of liquors. These corner groggeries we regard as one of the very worst features of our city life. No bar should be permitted where groceries are sold. It is a great source of corruption to the young, and a combined con- venience and temptation to which no community has any right to subject its weak members. " We recommend the needed legislation to separate the sale of groceries and the retailing of liquor, in addition to the moderate increase of licence above-mentioned." The total number of arrests by the police of San Francisco for the year 1889-90 was officially stated to be 23,549, California. 3'3 into a "uniiinii- tion of e been om forts nay he It; man mily in erity — unty of various 1" 2 I St, liquor is too gested !ie jury 'v way. > to his would y. Its liquor t corn- corner Lir city It is 1 con- sult to lale of ierate CISCO '549, including tt,6f8 for drunkenness. For the year 1891-2 the offences for wiich arrests were made numbered 29,259, including 14,652 cases of drunkenness (besides 544 "common drunkards"), and 195 breaches of the liquor law. 'i'he chief of police remarks that the increased number of arrests for drunkenness (2,542 more than in 1890-1) is to be accounted for by tlie increased number of police and the use of the patrol waggon and signal system. San Francisco is said to have a higher suicide rate than any other American city. The i)olice force in 1892 numbered 456 men, claimed to be propor- tionately a smaller force than in anv other seaf)ort cit\' in the United States.* 'i'en or twelve years ago an account (which has not been j)ul)lished) was taken of the nationality of saloonkeepers in San r'rancisco, when it was found that of about 2,600 licensees, 1,250 (in round numbers) were Germans, 650 were Irish, and only 200 were native Americans. A great number of nation- alities were represented, including more than too French. Restrictive ordinances similar to those of San Francisco are common in other towns of California ; but, where each place has power to settle its own regulations, uniformity is of course not to be expected. Among other things the licence fee is a varying (piantity, rising in some instances as high as $1,000. In Los Angeles the fee is $50 a month, paid monthly in advance ; and the apjilicant is recpiired to get the su})port of three-fourths of the frontagers in the same block. California contains fifty-four counties, some of them being of very great extent, and has a i)opulation averaging only eight to the S(}uare mile. It contains nine towns with populations of 10,000 and upwards. I heard altogether of two counties and about forty towns or districts, which by the operation of local ordinances either were or had in recent years been under l)rohil)ition. Tiie counties are Modoc and Sutter, the former in the * This must be exclusive of Portland, Maine. wl ','1 I 1^ 3«4 A!\!ERiCAX Liquor Laws. north-eastern corner of the State, and the latter a small county in the interior, north of Sncranicntf). With the exception of Alturas (1,013) "^ Mod(K: county, neither of them contains a town with a i)0]Hilation of as mucli as 1,000. The other places referred to are — Pasadena (4,882), Alhanihra (80.S), Artesia, Compton (636), Covina (93), Garden drove (126), Monrovia (907), The Palms, Pomona (3,634), Redondo (603), San Dimas, South Pasadena (623), Whittier (585), Potter Valley (219), Willits (815), Palermo, Buena Park, Orange (866), AVestminster (238), 1^1 Modena, Tustin, l,om])oc (1,015), Ontario (683), Coronado Beach, Del Mar, Escondido (541), Elsinore, I'^allhrook, Pie^iiiont, San Jacinto, San Marcos, Wildomar, Valle A'ista, Winchester, Ceres (206), Orange \'ale. College City (387), Riverside (4,683), Cliico \'ecino, Pacific C^rove (1,336). Some at least of these places have a special character as residential centres and winter resorts for the wealthier classes, and the desire to maintain that character and kee]) \\\) the value of real estate is believed to have had some influence in determining the lo(\il authorities to keep out the saloon, while at the same time })rohil)ition is not pressed to the extent of interfering with the convenience of tourists and visitors at the hotels. The prohibitory ordinance of Pasadena was passed in 1887, and runs as follows : — " It shall be unlawful for any person or persons either as owner, ])rincipal, agent, servant or employee, to establish, open, keep, maintain, or carry on, or assist in carrying on, within the corporate limits of the city of Pasadena, any ti{)pling house, dramshop, cellar, saloon, bar, ])ar-room, sample-room, or other place where spirituous, vinous, malt, or mixed liquors are sold or given away. . . . Provided that the prohibition of this ordinance shall not apply to the sale o^ liquors for medicinal purjioses by a regularly licensed druggist upon the prescription of a physician entitled to practise medicine under the laws of CiriFORxrA. 315 California, nor shall such prohibition apply to the sale of such lifjiiors for chemical or medicinal purposes." * Riverside, one of the places included in the foregoing list, has abandoned prohibition and resorted to high-licence. It has, as I am informed, a single saloon paying a fee of $1,000 a year. Another small town, Pomona, adopted in January, 1892, an ordinance of pecuHar stringency, by which any person con- cerned in keeping a liquor shop, or a place where liquor is distributed to members of an association, is to be imprisoned for ten days and fined $150 for every day on which the offence is committed. There is a saving for wholesale dealers in wine, and for druggists selling on a medical prescription, and for the sale for chemical and mechanical purposes. Any person visiting an illegal liquor shop or club is to be fined from $50 to $Too or imprisoned for not more than fifty days, or both ; and persons suspected of violating the ordinance are to be put under police surveillance. * The legality of this or.linance was disputed, and the case went to the Supreme Court of California, which decided (l)y six Judges to one dissent- ing) that the ordinance was good, being within the powers conferred by Art. xi. Sec. 11 of the State Constitution. It was objected to on the ground that it deprived the liquor deader of his property without due process of law, and was therefore unconstitutional. It was also urged that the ordinance was " in conflict with general laws" (within the terms of the above section), inasmuch as the Legislature had passed Acts for the inxrpose of encouraging the manufacture of wine and brandy in the State. It was, however, held that this legislation did not detract from the power of municipalities to regulate or prohil)it the sale of intoxicating litiuors in bar-rooms. The decision was expressly limited to the question of the right of the city to prevent " tippling houses, dramshops, and bar-rooms.'" (Kx parte Campbell, Pomeroy's California Reports, vol. 74, p. 20.) 'f i I CTTAITKR XVII. GEORCIA. (Local Option. High License.) The State of Georgia has a threefold claim on the attention of students of licjuor legislation in the United States. In the greater part of the State, outside of the more important centres of population, the sale of liquor is altogether forbidden ; its chief city, after a temporary exjierience of prohibition, which it abandoned, has now a licensing law with special features ; and one of its towns has made probably the first experiment in the country of a system resembling, in some respects, the Swedish method, the municipality taking over the liquor traffic into its own hands. Local prohibition has been brought about in three dis- tinct ways : by the operation of the general local option law ; by special jjrohibitory or local optional legislation, affecting l)articular areas ; and by Corporation Acts conferring powers of local self-government on individual municipalities. The general local option law of Georgia was enacted in 1885, and provides in substance as follows : — 1885. Chap. 182. General Local Option Law. A local option election is to be held on the application of one- tenth of the qualified voters in any county. The election is to be distinct from ariy other election, and is not to be held in the same month with any general election. If the majority is "against the sale," no person within the county may " sell or barter for valuable consideration, either directly or indirectly, or give away to induce trade at any place of business, or furnish at other public places any alcoholic, spirituous, malt, or intoxicating liquors, or intoxicating bitters, or other drinks which, if drank to excess, will produce intoxication." There is a saving clause for domestic wines and cider (but not to be sold in bar-rooms by retail), and for sacramental wine, and Geoiuha. 317 ior the sale of pure alcohol by druggistb lor mcdichial, art, scientific, and mechanical purposes. Elections under this Act are not to be held more frequently than once in two years, and no such election is to be held for any county, city, town, or other place having prohibition under a local law. A great number of local Acts liave been passed making special provision for prohibiting or regulating the liciuor traffic in particular counties or localities. Thus, without going further back, I find that 40 such Acts were p.isseil in 1884-5 24 ,, ,, ,, ,, i^^7 II ,, ,, M M 1^^^ 67 „ „ „ M 1^89 and 17 „ „ ,, ,, i^9C-i About 160 local licjuor statutes were thus passed within eight years. Such Acts may roughly be classified as follows :— 1. Acts prohibiting the sale of liquor in a county, town, or district, or repealing such prohibition, sometimes prohibiting for a county exclusive of a particular town, and sometimes subject to a power of reversal by popular vote.* 2. Acts providing for submission of the cjuestion to local option. The passing of Acts of this class has been discon- tinued since the general local option law of 1885. 3. Acts prohibiting within a certain distance (varying from one to five miles) of a particular church or place of education, such Acts being very numerous.! 4. Acts regulating the traftic in a cotmty or town ; * For example, Ads were passed in 1889 prohibiting the sale uf liquor in Polk and Delvalh counties ; Wilks county the same, exclusive of the town of Washington. Campbell and Clayton counties have Acts excluding the manufacture. In 1889 prohibition in Smithville (pop. 500), in Lee county, was repealed, and in Tike county it was repealed as regards Barnsville (1,800) and Molina (200). t In 1891 a general Act was jiasscd forbidding the sale of liquor within three miles of any church or schoolhouse, except in incorporated towns. 3i8 Amekjcax Liquor Laws, I sometimes rccjuiring each application for a lictnce to be siii)- ported by a majority, or by two-thirds of the freeholders within the licensing area, or within three miles of the ])remises*; sometimes introducing a high or even prohibitory Hcence fee (in one county it is fixed at $i 0,000). t 5. Acts providing for the election of an agent to sell li(|uor for medicinal and mechanical purposes.^ In addition to this large body of special liquor legislation, a great (juantity of Corporation Acts are passed, many of which confer large powers of self-government on particular municipal cor))orations, including often the i)Ower to miike ordinances regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic. Georgia has an area of 59,000 square miles, and is therefore slightly larger than England and Wales. According to the census it had in 1890 a population of 1,837,000, or about thirty-one inhabitants to the S(.}uare mile. It contains ten towns of over 5,000 inhabitants, of which five have ovei 10,000, and two, Atlanta and Savannah, over 40,000. No official returns are made showing the results of elections under the local option law, nor is any official information forth- coming to show the extent to which prohibition has been adopted throughout the State. From information, however, received through private sources, I believe that it may be stated that of the T37 counties into which the State is divided, prohibition is the law in just about 100, most of them rural counties containing no considerable town. The number has been slightly greater (about 108), but a few counties have gone back to licence. In * In Laurens two-thirds, and in Eftingham county a majority, of free- holders residing within tluce miles ; in incorporated towns and villages in Harris county two-thirds of freeholders in the area affected. t Wayne county $1,000, Telfair county $5,000, Emanuel county $10,000. A prohibitive licence fee has sometimes been passed when a proposal for direct prohibition would not have received the necessary support. X Acts of this character have been passed within the past few years for Oglethorpe, Hart, Newton, and Emanuel counties. G/:ORGIA. 319 li Ijc siip- t'holders of the ^hibitory • 11 li(iuor islation, nany of irticular o niiikc here fore to the !* about n towns 00, and lections n forth- idopted eceived t of the 1 is the taining greater :e. In of frec- lages in county vvlicn a :cessary V years some oi the "dry" counties, however, eKcepliou is made for certain towns ; and it may be sa"d generally that the larger towns do not put themselves under i)rohil)ition. As regards enforcement, the substance of the information which I received — mainly from persons favourable to prohibition — was to the effect that the law was fairlv well enforced in most places where the sentiment in favour of it was strong enough. There is, of course, a " jug" trade {i.e., an introduction of licjuor in bottles, jars, and casks for }jrivate consumption) ; but this is legal and cannot be stopped. In some places there are " blind tigers,"* but on the whole drinking, it is said, is much checked. As regards the "jug" business, this, in the opinion of one of my informants, is apt to be a diminishing ([uantity ; when prohibi- tion is new there is much of it, but with the lapse of time the demand decreases, and less liquor is introduced in this way. In proof of this tendency, he mentioned the exi)erience of an express company in a place where prohibition had been voted, and where the agent told him that at first they carried a large number of jugs of whisky, a service which had since gradually and constantly fallen off. On the subject of the "jug" trade, more will have to be said in connection with i)rohibition in Atlanta. One gentleman — a prohibitionist, exceptionally well posted on the liquor laws of this State — told me that prohibition was apt to be less well enforced in some of the counties which had adopted it under the general Local Option Act, than in those having special Acts. The reason he assigned was that a special Act could not be got through the Legislature without a peti- tion ; and, if a counter-petition was presented, the promoters of the Bill had to satisfy the Legislature that they were in the majority. Consequently a special Act was not passed without a fairly thorough canvass of public opinion in the area affected, nor unless that opinion declared itself decidedly in favour of * The usual term n the South for illegal hejuor shops# ! ■ ^ 320 Amkkjcan Liquor L.iiys. tlic proposed legislaticjii. An Act passed under these circum- stances was in general, he said, ])retly well carried out. Under the general law a vote was sometimes forced on by injudicious enthusiasts, sometimes carried hastily, and the result i)roved failure. A lawyer, who some years ago held office as Judge of the Circuit Court for three counties near the centre of the State, told nie that when he went into one of these counties to hold his lirst court a local option election was being held. The majority declared against hcences ; and on his last circuit, bvfore the expiration of his term of office, he found a marked diminution of crime. Only two prisoners were brought u[) for trial (one for homicide and one for breach of the prohibitory law) ; and the sheriffs fees for the year on account of prisoners in gaol, which in former times had been from $300 to $500, were only $20 — practically nothing. The county in (juestion has had prohibition ever since, and is said to be quite steadfast in it. It contains an agricultural population ; a good many negroes, though it is not a " negro county," the whites being in the majority ; and no large town (the chief place was credited with a population of 803 in the census of 1890). Those who want li(iuor get it by the bottle or in larger ([uantities from out- side, and there is said to be no considerable violation of the law. In this as in other States, the strictness with which prohi- bition is enforced varies in different places, according to the zeal of the local officials. Elections sometimes turn on the (.{uestion of a strict or slack enforcement. The presence of the negro element in the population of the South is on all sides recognised as giving a peculiar turn to the liquor ([uestion in this part of the country; audit becomes specially urgent in the agricultural districts, where the negroes are often in the majority and always numerous, and where the " cross-road doggery "' is the breeding-ground of much that is demoralising, and that may be a pubhc danger. Georgia. 321 The city of Atlanta was under prohibition for two years, I'ulton county (which includes Atlanta) ado[)ting it by popular vote under the general local option law, in 1S85, and renouncing it after a keenly-fought contest in 1887. A cause which materially contributed to the voting-out of the saloon, was the very unsatisfactory condition o the city under the old licence law. The number of dramshops was large, and many of them were of a disreputable kind ; drunken- ness and disorder prevailed; the lic^uor business was largely controlled by men of indifferent character, and the liciuor interest ruled in municipal affairs. This state of things led men to support the prohibition movement who were not in a general way prohibitionists, but who sought to strike a blow at the pre- vailing misgovernment. The saloons were voted out by a majority of about 225 votes in November, 1885. In the vigorous and somewhat bitter campaign which })re- ceded the re-submission of the question to the i)oi)ular vote two years later, the results of prohibition in Atlanta were fully discussed by friends and opponents from their respective standpoints.* The prohibitionists argued that the law had not had a fair trial, inasmuch as licences current when the vote was taken had been allowed to continue in force until the expiration of the period for which they had been granted, an indulgence which had enabled some of them to run on for nearly a year after the time when prohibition came nominally into force. Moreover, it was urged that legal difficulties had arisen in the enforcement of the law, difficulties which, when H i • * For a month before the election much excitement prevailed, and a good deal of heated language was used. Tliat the bitter feeling was kept alive for some time after seems to be shown by the following extract from the mayor's inaugural address in 1889: "By wisely and justly dealing with this irritating question {i.e., the liquor traffic), I am satisfied that we can aid in restoring harmony and peace to our people, and banishing this question from their discussions. We never knew unfriendly division before its introduction, and fortunate will we be if we are instrumental in satisfactorily removing it." V ■ '-, % 3'y ■> ^l M/.K /( .LV /JQ I/O A' I . I lyS. the machinery of achiiinistration liad got fairly into working order, vv(juhl disai)[)ear. Nevertheless, they maintained that much good had resulted ; crime had diminished, i)rosi)erity iiad increased ; the i)oor esi)ecially had benefited, their material condition giving evidence of marked imi)rovement in better homes and a brisker trade among the small retail shops. As regards the existence, extent, and causes of an increase in the general pros[)erity of the place during the prohibitory l)eriod, many conflicting statements were made and ()[)inions expressed ; and it might be difficult to reach any decided general conclusion upon this point, one way or the other. Upon the subject of crime some figures will api)ear later. With respect to the alleged benefit derived by the poor from the closing of the saloons, it was said that many more working-men had purchased homes for themselves and their families than had done so previously during an equal period, while several coal dealers gave evidence of increased sales of fuel to people of this class. The munici[)al relief committee observed in their report for 1886 that the calls for relief by the indigent poor had not been so numerous during that year as the preceding one. In confirmation of these statements a gentleman long resident in Atlanta told me that in a jjarticular quarter of the town, where he was personally interested in charitable work, the benefit to the families of workmen was marked. The i)orlion of their wages which ' '•• used to spend on drink was saved; and when the ';"' ^vere re-opened there were deep complaints among ' inen of the change in their home circumstances. Othv_.o gave me a similar account. The drain upon the weekly wages to pay the debts incurred for drink stoi)ped ; people of this class had not the forethought or the means to get liquor in by the jug from a distance ; and the result was an increased call for superior dwelling accommodation ; the small grocers and other shop- keepers did a larger cash business, and less on credit, a fact which one of my informants assured me he had verified by Georgia. 323 working ccl that rity had iiatcrial better ncrea.se libitory pinions lee i< led . Upon e poor ly more id their period, sales of nmittee ' by the year as lents a rticular sted in en was ) spend opened change similar : debts not the from a jperior shop- I a fact led by conversation with tradesnun who dealt with the poorer classes, and by ins[)ection of their books. One gentleman, who on other groimds had a decidedly unfavourable opinion of the results of prohibition in Atlanta, admitted to me that in this resi)ect a certain degree of good had ensued from it. Alto- gether the evidence seems to give substantial ground for believing that a section, at all events, of the working-classes was benefited by the removal of the temi)tation offered by the open saloons. Statementswere, however, made during the election cami).iign in November, 1887, which, if to any considerable extent true, would show that prohibition as it affected the working-classes was not in all respects a success. It was confidently and circum- stantially alleged that many operatives (especially among the (lermans) left the city, and betook themselves to other places where they were not subject to such restraints. Instances also were mentioned of workmen who habitually on [)ay-day sent to the nearest place for whisky by the bottle or jug, and in this way lost more time from drink than they ever lost before. The familiar argument was urged that while the rich man could have his jug it was unfair that the poor man, who was as well able to take care of himself, should be deprived of his glass of beer or whisky. Whatever view may be taken on the whole (}uestion ot prohibition in Atlanta, it is not disputed that during the pro- hibitory period an extensive "jug " trade was carried on ; and, whatever its effects may have been as regards the working- man, I was assured by some who had had full opportunity to observe its operation, that among men of a higher social grade it was a very serious evil. Men in business, clerks, and others (as I was informed) drank to an unprecedented extent, having bottles of whisky open in their houses and offices, with which they regaled themselves and their friends, and much drunken- ness resulted among men who before had not been at all in the habit of drinking. Some, it is said, fell into the habit through V 2 i : ' 1 324 American' Liquor Laws. a mere spirit of opposition to a law which sought to coerce them. "Jugs" of whisky came into Atlanta by the carload, and, as I have been told, the sidewalk in front of the I'.xpress Company's office would be covered with such jugs waiting for delivery among persons in the town who had ordered consign- ments from Griffin and other places. While not disputing the existence and the evils of the "jug" trade, the advocates of prohibition appear to be less impressed with the extent of it, and claim that it was greath' outweighed by the benefits already indicated. They attach great import- ance to the closing of the open saloons ; indeed many regard this as the one great advantage to be gained by prohibition ; and they maintain that in this instance it worked great good, through removing temptation from many who had not yet acquired a taste for strong drink. Those who wanted li(iu()r, it is admitted, could obtain it, but it was not attemi)ted to prevent them ; and some even among the prohibitionists admit that people who really want liquor will find means to get it, under any law. But it is on this side maintained that the entire consumption was very much diminished. However this may be, some strong and circumstantial statements were publicly made shortly before the election of 1887, about both the quantity of lic^uor brought into Atlanta in "jugs," and the evil effects produced by it, statements which I believe were not publicly (juestioncd or disproved. The following extract is taken from the published report of a speech delivered by the Hon. Clark Howell : — "The prohibition law has brought nothing but dissension. Almost every home has become a bar-room, and every young man has his bottle, so as to return the hospitality of his neighbour, I found live young men the other night, who until two years ago had never tasted liquor, in a deplorable plight, each with his bottle in his hip pocket. I had occasion 1 itely to enter the room of a friend, and found there six of the best-known young men of Atlanta-drunk and asleep, while upon the table stood six empty bottles." Georc/a. 325 "JUL?" By another si)eaker it was asserted that on October 29th, i(S87, there came into Atlanta on one train from (iriftm twenty-one two-gallon jugs, fifty-nine one-gallon jugs, seventy- five half-gallon jugs, five five-gallon jugs, and three five-gallon demijohns, besidjs ([uarts and smaller (juantitics, the total amount on a single train from a single place being 357 gallons. From the same place there were said to have been sent to Atlanta during the whole month of October 3,974 packages containing from a gallon to a barrel. A few months previously one house had despatched 1,400 packages in ^our days. In the same month of October, Atlanta, according to the same authority, received 550 packages of litjuor from Madison, 150 from Augusta, more than 200 from Lawrenceville, more than 250 from (iainesville, besides various (luantities from Chattanooga, Birmingham, Louisville, and other places ; also twelve car-loads of beer ; altogether, from nine ])laces, 32,500 gallons of whisky, besides beer, the whole valued at $142,000. It is obviously imj)0ssil)le that this can have been a normal month's supply for consumption in a city of 60,000 inhabitants. As regards the illegal sale of licpior in Atlanta itself, it was stated, on the authority of the Collector of Internal Revenue, that fifty-seven receii)ts had been issued in 1887 for payment of the United States liquor dealers' tax in Fulton county. As the local option law did not admit of the sale of licpior for any purpose whatever in prohibitory places, this tax could only have been paid for the purpos'^ of selling in violation of the State law. The collector also testified to a great increase of distilling in the State. Tiie result of the voting in November, 18S7, was a majority of 1,128 for a return to the licensing system, the total number of votes cast being something over 9,000. Only one precinct out of sixteen gave a "dry" majority, and that one was out- side of the city. The majority included [)ersons who two I 32 6 American Tjouor Laws. years hcfore liad voted the other way, either through dissatis- faction with tlie iiiUnicipal corruption and mal-administration with which the liquor business was bound up, or from a posi- tive behef in the virtues of prohibition which experience had not (n)n firmed. Since that time, Atlanta lias had a licensing system regu- lated by municipal ordinances passed under the powers con- ferred on the city by its Act of Incorporation.* The regulations are of a stringent character, and contain certain features which I have not met with in the legislation of any other State or city in the country. They constitute, indeed, a licensing code which in form and in substance is worthy of attention. They will be found set out in extcnso on pp. 416- 425. Meanwhile some of their leading provisions r "' here summarised : Licences are of thr'^c kinds : (i) wholesale, for the sale in quantities of a gallon and upwards ; (2) retail ; and (3) retail, ''or malt liquor only. Licences of the first two classes may be issued only in specified business portions of certain streets enumerated in the ordinance (that is to say, within what are known as the fire limits). Beer licences may not be issued within those limits, but may be issued outside of them "on business portions of business streets within practicable and efficient police supervision, and in localities where there is no reasonable objection thereto." * The charter provides: — *'Tliey" (the mayor and General Council) "shall have full power and authority to regulate the retail of ardent spirits withui the corporate limits of said city, and at their discretion to issue licence to retail, or to withhold the same, and to fix the price to be paid for licence at any sum they may think proper, not exceeding $2,000." "The mayor and General Council of said city shall have the power and authority to regulate the sale of liquors at wholesale in said city" (Law of 1889). '* The said mayor and General Council shall have full power and authority to prohibit the selling of lager beer, or other fermented drinks, without the obtaining of a licence for that purpose, provided the owner or keeper of each house or saloon kept for that purpose shall not be required to pay exceeding the sum of five hundred " (originally one hundred) *' dollars for a licence for one vcar." Gr.oRc/A. 327 ssatis- ration I posi- had con- ThQ ertain any ?ed, a hy of 416- here The mayor and (iencral Council may in every ca?e in their discretion grant or refuse an apphcation for a licence. licfore the issue of a wholesale licence, the applicant is rc([uircd to jiay the licence fee, and to make an oath and <,nve a $2,000 bond to observe the law. An applicant for a retail licence has to produce a certificate from two or more of his "sober, respectable, near neii^hbours, not interested in the application,' one of whom must be an adjoining neighbour, recommending the applicant as fit to be trusted with a licence. He must also produce the written consent of the owner or agent of the premises, and must give a bond in $f,ooo with two sureties for the keeping of a decent and orderly house, and for compliance with the liquor law, and make an affidavit that he has not been previously convicted of any breach of it. In case of any breach of the conditions of the bond, the amount thereof is declared to be liquidated damages, and recoverable by action in favour of the city. No person may be surety on more than one bond at the same time. Before a licence is granted, the police are personally to examine the locality and give notice to adjacent tenants or owners, and also to the owner of the place proposed to be licensed, and are to report to the mayor and Council. Retail licences are to be issued only to persons " of good character, sobriety, and discretion." i. The licence fees are ; — For a wholesale licence For .1 retail licence For a leiail (l)eer) licence (Raised from $100 in 1S91). $2500 $1000.00 $250.00 Licensed premises (whether wholesale or retail) are r'^quired to bs closed from ten at night till five in the morning ; a place for which a retail licence is granted must have no screen, blinds, painted glass, or other obstructions to the view through the doors and windows, and (subject to a saving clause for bar-rooms in hotels) must front, or have its main entrance on, and be substan- tially on a level with, a public street, subject to a j)ower to license the sale " in basements sufficiently open to view." Conviction of an offence against the licensing law not only subjects the offender to fine or imprisonment, or both, but operates 1 328 Amenican Liquor Laws. ipso facto as a forfeiture of his licence* Any one convicted of selling sjiirits under cover of a beer licence is to be imprisoned for thirty days, as well as being fined. The mayor and Council are to forfeit the licence of any retailer " whose place becomes a nuisance or of ill-repute by disorder thereat or otherwise." Minors are not allowed to enter bar-rooms, and the words " No minors allowed in here " have to be conspicuously posted on the premises. Anyone appearing on the streets in an intoxicated condition is to be punished by a fine not exceeding $ioo, or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days, or both ; but may avoid the punishment by gi\ ing such evidence as will lead to the conviction of the person who furnished him with the liquor by which he became intoxicated. By the census of 1890, Atlanta is credited with a population of 65,500 ; but it claims at the present day to have gone con- siderably beyond that figure. It certainly increased rapidly during the decade 1880—90, and has now all the ap[)earance of continued growth and prosperity. It is, perhaps, the most active and enterprising town in the southern States. Before the experiment of })rohibition was tried in 1885, the retail licjuor shops numbered about 130 to a poi)ulation of about 50,000. The number now is 70, or about one to every thousand of the population. Among the various residents, men in official positions and others, from whom I sought information, I found a prepon- derance of opinion favourable to the existing law, which appears to be well enforced, and to have gained the public favour to an extent sufficient at least to banish any widespread or active movement in favour of a return to prohibition, or a resort to any other radical change of system. One who had voted on l)oth occasions for prohibition told me that the existing law was, in his o])inion, the best and most efficient * The validity of this provision has been upheld in the courts (Sprayberry v. the city of Atlanta, 1891). (rr.ORGL]. 329 i that could be devised for a city of the size of Atlanta, its operation comparing favourably with that of prohibition, when the "jug" trade and the sale of pseudo-" temperance " drinks were a serious evil PTere, as in Minneapolis, merit is claimed for the system of confining the saloons within a strictly limited area in the centre of the town."**" The bar-rooms, too, are said to be punctually closed at to p.m., and on Sundays to remain closed throughout the day. I was assured that these and other regulations of the law — that, for instance, which forbids the sale of liquor to persons under age — were observed with much strictness ; and the claim that the law is better enforced in no other city in the United States of equal size seems to be not without justification.! Prohibitionists, indeed, say that there is drunkenness, a; ' that illegal liquor-selling goes on ; and they object, of course, to the existence of the open saloon, and point to li.e prevalence of crime. A prominent lawyer and ex-Judge, one of the leading prohibitionists in Atlanta, told me that, in his opinion, great good could be done by stopping the retail sale of liquor, and putting an end to on-licences, while leaving the wholesale trade undisturbed. This plan, he thought, would put a stop to most of the mischief caused by drink, while not attempting the impossible. A vast proportion of people, he said, drink because * In the mayor's annual addresses, reference is repeatedly made to the importance of this limitation, in the interest of a proper police supervision. t In proof of the exact observance of the hour for closing, a resident told me that, some friends from Boston whom he was entertaining having expressed their disbelief in the accuracy of his assertion that drink could not be obtained after 10 p.m., he offered to pay their expenses to New Orleans and back if they could get served after that hour. They started out with confidence, but returned crestfallen. The rolice-Committee in their annual report for 1891 say : " We believe that Atlanta has the li(|uor- traffic, where the same exists at all, under the best control of any city in the Union ; and though this is strong language, we use the same after mature consideration. It is impossible to get liquor after ten o'clock at night, before five o'clock in the morning, or on Sunday at all ; and under no circumstances are minors allowed in bar-rooms." ■r 3^o American Liquor Laws. it is so easy to get a drink, and because their friends invite them to it. Numbers of such people have not the forethouglit, and many have not the money, to lay in a stock of liciuor. Many people, too, have no place where they could drink liquor, even if they had it, exce})t the saloon. Some few years ago a candidate was run for the office of State senator on the issue of bringing in a Bill prohibiting sales by retail or for consumption on the premises. He was beaten only by a small majority, his opponent being a strong candidate, a wealthy man, holding views such as would gain the support of many moderate people. More recently, it was sought at the municipal elections for Atlanta to carry six councilmen and an alderman pledged to endeavour to stop the issue of retail licences in that city. This attempt, however, was easily de- feared. On the whole, I found little evidence that any radical change in the liquor law was to be expected in Atlanta for some time to come ; or, indeed, that the existing condition ot things was otherwise than satisfactory, by comparison at least with that in most other cities. The town is orderly ; and I found no evidence of the existence of much drunkenness. The following table contains some statistical information extracted from the yearly municipal reports. No classified statement is published of the crimes for which arrests are made ; it is, therefore, only possible to give the total number of arrests for each year. The prohibitory years (1886 and 1887) show a diminished return of arrests. In the last three years the increase is marked ; but against this must be set the increase in population, the extension of the city boundary, the improved efficiency of the police, and (as I am informed) the increased number of offences created by new ordinances. Arrests for mere drunkenness have also, I am told, been made of late more frequently than in former year.s. Gr.oh'CLi. nvite O O < *^»n ,: '-' " J Q /-^ Q s '■'^ o 2 ro o rt -r) cT^ „ 5 H- f^ o -+ o M ""O ri -/-, — M HH O On O M— 'w^-^ -^rj >-ir^ t-^VD ,' ON^ O O >3 Q O "■O -t ^ c/j >, O -' O "-> C) w •/- i-i - \o rj (X i^ "^"^n?"^-:. oooo GO CTO rt C/O CLf^ O O i«. o t^ • oo M 0«'riCOrj r^t^ OnO ►H ^^"'-' ^ m t^ vo CO oo t-^ >n ' N ^ Q O ■ rC w -r o' (J Cio' oo" •& CO t^ o o fe-00^ '^ roco S ^ >^ O ^" ON - ^'J ^O X ++ o^o o "^ O t^ O t^ N lO OO - t^ Q O O -T — 8^ ^^-2.^5 ^u ^ O oo" N CO oo ro 00 CO iTiw .'■ ^ • O '*00 Q Q Ou^iju-i'C; oooio OO 00 GO'-' O G O lO O O On ro C4 fO 3 O (A In O OJ o Di o o OJ ■<-' S c '•" S . o : c ■*- o * "* I ii o o ■- o — OJ .2 '^-SS. .- ^^ >N 2 'S 'A • l/> ll O IS .5 c-c ^ rt I- '2 I- ;i rt c 5 c _^ >> g rt > o ^-^^^ rt rt . JS (U >, s 5 Q - H — . rt F^ Q. . ro ~ii O C -^ pi ' .-' (U 3 rt "?> " rt "" rt a OJ O - a; j; OJ t/; o g - ^ "u rt 3 O vO rt .ti ♦"> -rt ^ lo C o O rt rr' H — ^^ U OJ f S--'"^ '-:5 rt .S--= - O '^ .- ^ O ^ OJ >. o c ?) >, 0\ o rt o rt ^ ^ , != D CJ rt '-^ y; ->Nty ^ >; D ■" .-H *j ^-~ r:; o ir'n o !/3 ' o 'y; .^ ' =2 4J o J? c -:; 1) = g >§^.2 ^.y i-g '^ c t/32 S "^ ii S c ^08 •ST" rt 5 j5 r^ ti biOS O 3 in ri tr. ri _ -„ rt rt g £J "^ t/i ti rt ti c) w rt OJ X - U-) rt -C >, rt ID ^ U rt "S 4J ^_ - jy.H 3 cr.2 o.ti rt^-^'o'- 5 (1 >- O ni ^ O 2i ^ c "^ bi3'3 _Q i= '^ 52 rt -S^H'-^cS'^ c 3 3 O ++--^' t/3 C ^ 71 a, " _3 O rt C C r, C^ ti "'■ 3 * n-H- rt c o ill f j;. "«> 33' A iVr.K n w x 1. 1< > in ' />• /, / /; s. A statute passed in August, 1891, inaugurated a new departure in the Ii(iuor legislation of this State. Under this measure, in the small city of Athens (poi)ulation 9,000), in ('lark County, containing the State University, three com- missioners nre established, of whom one retires annually-- his place being filled by nomination of the two remaining commissioners, subject to the approval of the mayor and Council. The duty of the commissioners is to establish and maintain a dispensary for the sale of liquors, and ])lace it in charge of a manager under their supervision. The manager is appointed and may be removed by them, and he has to give a bond of not less than $2,000 for the faithful performance of his duties. He has to be paid a fixed salary ; his remuneration must not be dependent on the amount of his sales. No person holding any cor})orate office in the city, or any county office, is eligible as commissioner or manager. The commissioners are to receive for their service such sums as the mayor and Council determine — not less tlian $100 each per annum. All bills f(ir the maintenance of the dispensar)- and purchase of stock are to be paid by the City Treasurer. The manager is to sell only for cash, and is to turn o\er all his receipts daily to the treasurer. The commissioners have to make regulations for the operation of the dispensary. "The quantity to be sold to any purchaser shall be determined by them, but in no event shall wine or liquor be furnished in less quantities than one half-pint, and none shall be drank in the building or on the premises where the dispensary is established. The dispensary shall not be open before sunrise, and shall be closed each day before sunset, and it shall be closed on Sundays, public holidays, election dajs, and such other days as the commissioners shall direct." Li(iuor is not to be supplied to any student of the University, whether minor or adult, either directly or indirectly, except on the written order of the Chancellor of the University. The commissioners are to fix the prices to be charged for liquors, which, however, arc not to be sold for a profit exceeding fifty per cent, above the actual cost, *' it being the purpose of this Georgia. 333 new this ), in com- ■--his inintj Act that the dispensary shall be manat^^ed in such a way as to pay its expenses, and any revenue derived shall be simply an incident to, and not the object of, the dispensary." Liquor is to be sold only in sealed packages, and the manager is to report monthly to the commissioners the amount of his sales and the stock remaining on hand at the end of the month. All liquor is to be examined and analysed by a chemist and passed by him as pure before sale. No lic(uor is to be sold in the dispensary to persons purchasing for the purpose of selling again, either lawfully or unlawfully, and the commissioners are required to make such rules, and to require the manager :o make such investigation, as will pre\ent persons from so purchasing ; and, if the commissioners are satisfied that any person is purchasing lic[uor repeatedly for the purpose of re- selling, they may direct the manager not to sell to him except on a medical certificate. The manager is not to allow any person to loiter in or about the disjjensary, and any person refusing to leave is liable to punishment. The mayor and Council arc required to pass such ordinances as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act, and are to provide suitable penalties for the violation of its provisions and of the commissioners' regulations ; and are to appropriate any sums necessary from time to time for the dispensary. The commissioners have to report annually to the mayor and Council, and any net profits of the dispensary for the year are to be equitably divided between the city of Athens and the county of Clark upon a plan to be agreed upo:; by the Mayor of Athens and the Ordinary of Clark county. if they fail to agree, they shall each choose an arbitrator, and these two, with a third se- lected by themselves, are to settle a plan of division for the year. The sum awarded to the city and county resjjectively may be appropriated by the respective authorities for any purpose for which the)- may lawfully appropriate money. This law is, I believe, unique in American legislation. It has not as yet been adopted by any other place in this State, but it may have had some influence in shaping the new law of South Carolina."*^ * In a village ir. New York State, Union Springs, the saloons have been placed under the control of a committee includinjj the local clerj^y. i I \ I l\ 334 Amur /CAN Liquor Laws^ The general licensing law of Georgia, which apphes to those portions of the State which are not subject to prohibition or to any special local law, [)rovides that application for a licence to sell spirituous licjuors in any (juantity less than a gallon (and, under a law of 1890, in any greater ([uantity) must be made annually to the Ordinary of the county, who has power to grant or refuse the application. On grant of a licence the applicant must take an oath not to sell to a minor without the consent of his parent or guardian, and must give a bond in $500 conditioned to abide by his oath and to keep an orderly house. The county retail licence fee is $25. The above provisions as to licensing do not apply to any corporation, town, or city which by charter has power to grant licences at an equal or higher fee. Another general law i)rovidcs for the inspection of liquors. (Code of 1882, sees. 1580—7.) City and incorporated town authorities, and in counties the Ordinary, may appoint inspectors to examine liquors every month, and require the destruction of such as are injuriously adulterated. Dealers are required under penalty to have their liquors inspected before sale. Penalties are enacted for selling without a licence, keeping open a tippling house on Sunday, selling to minors, or on election days, etc. ; and by an Act of 1891 the court sentencing the offender is required to cancel his licence, whereupon he becomes disqualified for a year from obtaining another. The following public laws are also in force : — 1887, Chapter 168. — In counties having prohibition with a saving clause for any kind of wines (domestic or other), dealers of such wines, unless also manufacturers, are required to pay a tax of $10,000 annually ; and such wines are not to be sold in less quan- tities than a quart, and are not to be drunk on the premises. 1887, Chapter 154. — The sale of opium (except on medical prescription) to persons habitually addicted to its use, after written notice of such habit from a near relative, is prohibited. 1889, Chapter 175. — It is made a misdemeanor for any seller of spirituous liquors to sell or furnish liquors or other intoxicating drinks to any person who is intoxicated. .^SiMW^^^ ■ fc!. if» B 'i f ^ - T Georgia. 335 1890, Chapter 153.— The possession or consumption of liquor in a place of divine vvor^^hip is prohibited, subject to a saving clause for medical men, and for cases of accident, and wine for communion. 1891, Chapters 281, 702. The sale of liquor within three miles of any church or school-house, except in incorporated towns and cities, is forbidden under penalty, subject to a saving clause for domestic wines and for physicians, and for manufacturers selling to legally authorised dealers in original packages of not less than 40 gallons. 1891, Chapter 688.-Domestic wine is defined to mean wine made from berries, grapes, or other fruits grown in the State. >.. *; 336 CIIAITKR XVIII. MARY'. AND. VIk(,INIA. KENTUCKY. SOUTH CAROLINA. (Local Option. State Dispensaries.) Maryland. Maryland has no general law with regard to the li(|uor traffic. The practice in this State is to legislate separately, according to the wishes and re(iuiremcnts of each separate locality. It is, therefore, impossible to give here any full or general account of the subject as it affects the whole body of the i)eople. As an example of the piecemeal character of the legislation of Maryland, it may be mentioned that in 1890 about thirty statutes were enacted by the State Legislature, dealing in one way or another with the liquor trade in as many sei)arate cities, towns, counties, districts, and villages, the Acts in some cases jjrohibiting the sale either within the area dealt with, or within a certain distance of that area ; in other cases giving a right of local option ; in others regulating the trade in various ways. Similar laws were also passed in 1888. In 1890 local o[)tion votes were taken in three counties, and prohibition was carried in one of them. Of the two others which rejected it, one had been under prohil;ition during three years previously. The following is a summary of the law affecting the City of Baltimore, passed in 1890, prior to which year the duties were low, and there was little restriction on the issue of licences. The County of Baltimore, in which the city is locally situated, has a licence law of its own, separate and differing from the law in force in the city. The licensing authority for the City of Baltimore is a Board of three Licence Commissioners appointed by the Cjovernor. Licences for the sale of intoxicating litjuor by retail may be granted for one year to citizens of the United Slates of temperate I I M.lRVf.AXlK 337 h.ibits and ^-^oocl moral character. The vote of tlie members of the board is rc(|uired to be taken, after a public hearing,', on the ciuestion of granting or refusing eveiy application for a licence ; and the board has to keep a full record of all applications, and all recom- mendations for and remonstrances against the granting of licences, and of their action thereon. Certain i)articulars have to be stated in the apjilication .and verified by affidavit ; and the applic; tion must be supported by ten voters residing or doing business in the ward. A licence must always be refused when in tlie opinion of the board it is not necessary for the accommodation of the public, or the petitioner is not a fit person. If a licensee violates any State law relating to the sale of intoxicating lic[uor, the board is required to revoke his licence. The licence fee is $250, whether for an hotel or restaurant, a grocer (for consumption off the premises'), or a distiller, brewer, or wholesale dealer ; one-fourth of it goes to the State, the remainder to the city. The usual prohibition is enacted against selling to minors and drunkards, and against selling on election days and Sundays, except in hotels to guests. Liquor may not be sold between midnij^ht and 5 a.m. (except at entertainments by special permission of the Board of Police.) Druggists do not require a licence, but arc not allowed to sell litiuors except on a written medical prescription, and have to keep a record of all such sales. Persons selling liquor without a licence are liable to a fine from $500 to $5,000, or imprisonment from three to twelve months, ( r both fine and imprisonment. Any licensed person convicted of violating the Act or the conditions of his licence is subject to a fine from $100 to $500; for a second oflfence his licence is revoked, and the fine is $500 to $1,000, vnth or without imprisonment three to twelve months. The licence of any person who permits minors to frequent or loiter about his place, or disreputable or disorderly persons to make it a customary place of visitation or resort, may upon proof be revoked by the criminal court, or by the Licensing Board ; and he is disqualified for two years from obtaining another licence. Upon complaint by any voter of the city (who gives security for costs) that a licence has been corruptly or knowingly issued to a person who has not complied with the provisions of the Act, the State's Attorney is required to proceed against the board. W li 338 American Liquor Laws. fl The term "intoxicatini,^ li(|uor " includes all fermented and distilled liquors and mixtures containing more than two per cent, of alcohol (or less if intoxicating). The effect of the law of 1890, raising the licence fees and conferring on the commissioners a discretionary power to refuse licences, was immediately to produce a reduction in the number of saloons and jjlaces where li(}uor was sold, from about 3,200 to somewhat less than 2,000. In 1892 there was a very slight increase. The number of arrests for drunkenness and disorderly conduct for the years 1890 and 189 1 (35,638) shows a diminution of more than eight percent, as compared with the two preceding years; a decrease which is more marked when the fact is taken into account that the city limits were extended in June, 1888, and that the old Licence Law was in force during the first four months of 1890. A comparison of the same two biennial periods shows a much larger proportionate falling off in the offence of selling liquor on Sunday.* As between 1890 and 1891, no material difference appears in the number of arrests for mo^t crimes, but there is a con- siderable diminution in the latter year in arrests for selling without Hcence and to minors. The illegal selling of licjuor on Sundays fell off very much under the new law. One of the city coroners, in making a very small return of inquests held by him, attributed to the same cause the prevention to a great extent of homicides and fatal accidents. The report of the warden of the Baltimore City Jail for 1891 shows that 7,677 prisoners were committed during that year for drunkenness and breach of peace \ and the warden takes occasion to criticise the practice of committing men for * The figures are derived from the Report of the Board of Police Conunissioncrs for the City of IJallimore. As the police of the city are under State conlrol, and the Stale Legislature sits unly ouce in t^vo years, the report is made to that body biennially. Maryla.xd. 339 thirty days for being drunk, whether they are habitual offenders or not. Such a seritence, he urges, is unreasonably severe in many cases, while for the habitual drunkard it is altogether inadcciuate. The report from the hospital department of the jail shows 1,164 cases of alcoholism and forty-six of delirium tremens treated during the year. According to the report from the Baltimore City Almshouse, 1,800 persons, out of 2,400 admitted in 1 891, were of intemperate habits. Nearly one-half of the whole number admitted were foreign born. There were but few cases of alcoholic insanity in the city insane hospital. Virgi?iia. This State has a general local option measure, passed in 1886, and a somewhat elaborate licensing law. The licence fees are low. Special legislation has been less common than in some others of the southern States. 1 1 Local Option Laio. — [Chapter 248 of the Acts of 1885—6 ; §§ 581 — 587 of the Code of 1S87.] An election is to be held for (i) a county, or (2) a magisterial district in a county, or (3) a city, or (4) any town constituting a separate election district, on the application of a number of voters (i) in each magisterial district in the county, or (2) in the particular magisterial district affected, or (3) in the city or town, equal to one-fourth of the perboi voting at the last preceding November election. Section 584 of the Code is as follows : — " Notwithstanding the election is held for the whole county, the vote shall be by districts, and if it appeal from the abstracts and returns that a majority of the votes cast in any magisterial district have been cast against licensing the sale of intoxicating liquors, no licence shall be granted for the sale of wine, spirituous, or malt li([uors, or any mixture thereof, in such district. If, on the other hand, it appear from the abstracts and returns that a majority t . , le votes cast in any magisterial district have been cast in favour of liquor licence, then a licence may be granted for the sale of wine, spirituous, or malt liquors, or any mixture thereof, in such district. Where the w 2 U I ii 340 A yi ERIC AN Liquor Laws. election is held in a maj,fisteiial district only, or in a city, if it appear from the abstracts and returns that a majority of votes in such election have been cast against licence, no licence shall be g^ranted for the sale of wine, spirituous, or malt liquors, or any mixture thereof, in such district or city." Similarly in the case of a town where a vote is taken (A.cts of 1889—90, c. 203). A local option election is not to be held within 30 days of any county, corporation, State, or national election. A no-licence vote extends to prohibit within the area atitected the sale by distillers, and by manufacturers of wine and malt liquors. Druggists may sell on a medical prescription ; but must take out a retail licence, except for liquors used in preparing medicines. Licence Law. — A liquor licence is granted by a Commissioner of Revenue of the county or corporation in which the business is to be carried on, but in the case of a retail licence or a licence for a bar-room, malt-liquor saloon, or ordinary, only on a certificate from the county or corporation, or Hustings Court of the county or city. In the case of a city having a Board of Commissioners of Excise, the application must first be endorsed " approved " by the com- missioners (hereafter mentioned). The county, corporation, or Hustings Court is then to hear the evidence for or against the application, and hear and determine the question of granting it. Any person who may think he would be aggrieved by the granting of the licence may contest it. If the court, after hearing the evidence, is fully satisfied that the applicant is a fit person to conduct the business and will keep an orderly house, and that the place at which it is to be conducted is a suitable, convenient, and appropriate place for conducting such a business, the court, on the execution by the applicant of a bond in not less than $250 nor more than $500 for his faithful compliance with all the requirements of the Act, may grant the licence. There is an appeal to the Circuit Court against either the grant or refusal of a licence. Under a law of 1890 (Statutes of 1889 — 90, c. 244) three kinds of licences are issued : — (i) wholesale (5 gallons or more, and in the case of beer 12 bottles or more); (2) retail (not exceeding 5 gallons, for off-consumption) ; (3) bar-room, ordinary, or malt- liquor saloon (on- consumption only). A person desiring to do a wholesale and retail, or a retail and bar-room, business must take out a separate licence for each, on Virginia. 341 penalty of a fine of $100 to $500, and, in the discretion of the court, imprisonment not exceeding 12 months ; the tax, however, on the second licence is reduced by one-half. A druggist who sells liquors (except in prepared medicine) must take out a retail licence. '• It shall be the duty of the Judge of the Circuit, County, or Corporation Courts to give this Act, and particularly the provisions thereof in reference to the sale of ardent spirits, wine, malt liquors, or any mixture thereof, in charge to the grand jury at every regular grand jury term of their respective courts, and to send before the grand jury the constables and the Commissioners of Revenue, with the view of ascertaining whether any person in their districts is engaged in the sale of liquors without a licence." Special provision is made for sample liquor merchants : the tax on their licence is fixed at $350. The licence taxes are : — Wholesale ... ,, (malt liquor only) Retail (in the country or in towns and villages of not more than 1,000 inhabitants) ,, ( ,, ,, ) malt liquor only ,, (elsewhere) ... Bar-room (in the country or in towns and villages of less than 1,000 inhabitants) And an additional sum equal to 15 per cent, of the rent or rental value of the bar-room. ,, (elsewhere) .. And 15 per cent. Malt liquor saloon (in the country or in towns of 1,000 inhabitants, or less) „ ,, „ (elsewhere) Ordinary (in the country or in towns with a population of 2,000, or less) .. ,, (elsewhere) With the addition in either case of a sum equal to 8 percent, of the rent or rental value of the house and furniture used for the purposes of the ordinary up to $1,000 of such rent or value ; and on the rent or value in excess of $1,000 and under $2,000, 5 per cent. ; and from $2,000 upwards, 3 per cent. A licence for an ordinary includes the piivilege of selling liquor for consumption on, but not off, the premises. $350 150 75 30 125 75 12: 40 60 75 125 342 American Liquor Laivs, Any person who for compensation furnishes lodging and diet to travellers, sojourners or boarders, and sells liciuor for con- sumption on the i)remiscs, is deemed to keep an ordinary, and is recjuircd constantly to provide the same with lodging and diet for travellers, and (unless dispensed with by the court) stabling or pasturage and provender for horses. In 1890 a State Board of Commissioners of Excise was established, with the duty of appointing three commissioners of excise for every city in the State, to act as a Licensing Hoard, with the dut>' of incjuiring into the character of every applicant for a licence, the " suitability, con\cnicnce, and appropriateness of the place at which the proposed business is to be conducted, and the general propriety of approving the application." Petitions of resident citizens for and against the application are to be con- sidered by the board, which has ))ower to summon witnesses. After hearing all the testimony adduced, and ''making the investi- galion necessary to satisfy themselves on the matters refeircd to their discretion, the board may approve or disa])provc the apjilication as it seems right and proper to do." The object of this measure is thus explaineil in its preamble, which recites that "there exists in the cities of the Commonwealth a growing dissatisfaction with the system under which licences for the sale of ardent spirits are granted ; and whereas the Legislature recognises the justice of the urgent and inii)erative demand, grow- ing out of this dissatisfaction, for a change in the i)resent system, and is disposed to surround the granting of these licences in large municipal cori)orations with all the safeguards suggested by an enlightened and j^rogressive public policy." From private informa- tion I am given to understand that this law was passed to enable the Stale to collect the liquor licences in money instead of coupons, and that it was not enacted in the interest of temperance. On the motion of the county or city attorney or of any other person, the court which j, "anted the certilicate may revoke the licence. No bar-room, saloon, or other place for the sale of intoxicating liquors may be opened on Sunday. I'cnalty, fine $10 to $500, and, in the discretion of the court, forfeiture of licence ; but this is subject to the police regulations of any city, and any ordinance prescribing an equal penalty. For furnishing liquor to a minor, " having good reason to believe him to be such," without written authority from his parent 11- Virginia , 343 or guardian, or to any student of the Hampton Normal and Agricultural Institute, the i)enalty is fine $io to $300, .and recognisances for good behaviour for twelve months. For selling liquor on election day, fine not exceeding $f,ooo, and imprisonment not exceeding one year. " If any person, arrived at the age of discretion, profanely curse or swear, or get drunk, he shall be fined by a justice one dollar for each offence/' — (Code, section 3,798). Spccidl /.i\i^islai!o>i, 1887. — An Act having been passed in 1884, providing for local ojjtion in Amburst county, two out of the four magisterial districts carried prohibition, but the other two rejected it. These latter districts appear to hr.ve been debarred from taking a vote under the General Local Option Act of 1886. and an Act was therefore passed conferring on them this right. * 1892. -An Act was i)assed authorising the Board of vSui)ervisors of J^lizabeth City county to levy and api)ly to county purposes a liquor tax ecjual to the tax levied by the .State, t 1892. — An Act was passed making si)ecial provision for sup- pressing illegal sales of li(.|uor in Lee, Pulaski, .Scott, Wise, Dickenson, Luchanan, Bland, and Russell counties. Places where liquor is illegally sold are declared public nuisances, etc. The Secretary to the State Temperance As.sociation tell.s me that the special law for these eight counties " was aimed at blind tigers." These counties will not, under the local option law, permit the sale of liquors in any district ; and, to evade it, liquor was put in some obscure house, and a man could go there, deposit the money in a till, get his li(iuor, and go away without seeing anyone at all not even the man who put it there for sale. Upon the general subject of local oi)lion, the same informant * I understand that at the present time only one district in Ainhur.^t county is " dry." f A correspondent writes to me: — "The Elizabeth City County Act was passed to enable that county to collect more liquor revenue l)y raising the licence, and getting more money for county purposes. In raising the licence, iiowever, the numl)er of saloons was reduced ; the little doggeries could not alTord it.'' 344 American Liquor Laws. writes to me that the law of 1886 was at once taken up with much energy, and made a lodgment in every one of the 100 counties in the State, in twenty of which all licences were with- drawn, while in the remainder they were confined to the cities and towns. " Local option " (he writes) " in my opinion is the most effective remedy against licence. By submitting the question every two years under our law, a discussion of the same is indulged in by all ; it educates the people ; they hear it presented in ways they had never heard of, nor thought of. It creates a jiublic sentiment, and, unless a law is sustained by })ul)lic sentiment, it cannot be enforced. The law and pul)lic sentiment are inter-dependent — united they stand, divided they tall." P>om others in this State who, equally with the writer of the letter of which the foregoing is an extract, desire the com- plete suppression of the liquor trade, I heard a less favourable account of the position and prospects of local option. I am assured that, except in purely rural areas, prohibition has now a footing in only a small portion of the State. One corre- spondent (a thorough-going prohibitionist) writes from Nor- folk : " I think, upon the whole, local option does much good as an educator towards prohibition j but it never settles any- thing. There is also a tendency on the [)art of many tem- perance people to rest on their oars as soon as local option is adopted in their own town." The general (lis})osition, which at first appeared, to adopt the Act of 1886 does not seem, on the whole, to have been very well maintained. Some counties, which adopted the Act as a whole, soon gave up the districts in which the court houses were situated, because it was evaded and brought dis- credit upon the law. A "dry" majority at one election has frecjuently been reversed at the next, and many instances of repeated changes to and fro between wet and dry are mentioned. So for as the cities are concerned, local option has had little operation. Of eighteen cities in the State, one only is Virginia, 345 prohibitory. Richmond (population, 81,000) is said to be a long way removed from any disi)osition to vote " dry." A local option vote was taken there a few years ago, and the majority against prohibition was, I believe, something like five to one. There is a large wholesale business in Richmond, and the liquor interest has much strength. Lynchburg, however (pop., 20,000), nearly carried a pro- hibition vote a few years ago.* Rcanoke (16,000) also came near to voting dry. The licensing authority in Richmond appears to be, practi- cally, the Judge of the Hustings Court. The i)oints con- sidered in the case of an ap])lication are the character of the applicant and the location of the premises, which must not be in a residential neighbourhood where it would be objection- able, and must not be close to a church or school. Applica- tions are referred to the captain of police in the district in which the premises are situate, in order to ascertain that there is no objection in that quarter. There is no restriction in respect of number, and the licence fee is low — $125, and less for beer. There are about 500 bar-rooms in Richmond, and 300 retail licences ; but, as a bar-keeper often takes out a retail licence to enable him to sell for off-consumption, the 300 licences do not imply that number of dealers in addition to the 500 bar- keepers. No trouble, I am told, is experienced in regard to the beer licences, through people selling spirits under cover of them. As a matter of fact, few beer licences are issued. Sunday closing is not strictly enforced. The side-door business goes on, but is conducted quietly ; disturbances are rare, and anything disorderly in a saloon on Sunday would lead to a pvosecutiori. No police statistics as to arrests are published. The Judge of the Hustings Court has jurisdiction (which * Prohibitionists, indeed, claim that they had a majority, but were deprived of their victory by a misrount. u VV' vi ^i: .■I ; ■^ ti 1) If ft 1 346 American Liquor Laivs. he told me that he i)ractically exercised) to take away licences for cause. I ! I i Kentucky. Tn addition to general licensing and local option laws, Kentucky has passed a considerable body of special legislation affecting particular localities, and amongst other matters deal- ing with the liquor (|uestion in various ways. The new Clon- stitution, however, adoi)ted in 1891, and sui)erseding the Constitution of 1849, has put a stop for the future to the system of special legislation, from which serious abuses had arisen.* It has also involved the passing of much new legisla- tion of a general character, the old laws, however, being allowed to continue in force until re-enacted with reference to the new order of things. Of s})ecial li(|uor Acts no less than sixty were passed in 1890 alone, some of them prohibiting the sale of liijuor in a particular county or town, or within one, two, or three miles of a particular church or school ; others providing for the taking of a local option vote ; others giving licensing powers to certain municipalities ; and in one case at least fixing a high licence fee. In some instances the sale by retail or in quantities less than a fixed amount {e.g.^ ten gallons) is alone forbidden. The existing general licence law provides in substance as follows : — Licences to sell spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors by retail (/.f., in quantities less than live gallons) are granted by the County Court. Notice is to be given of each application ; ''and if the majority of the legal voters in the neighbourhood shall protest against the application, it shall be refused." The County Court determines what constitutes " the neighbourhood." * One of the evils arising out of the facilities .-llowed for special legisla- tion was the growth of special jurisdictions ousting the ordinary Courts of Justice and setting up separate trihuiials for particular localities, Kentucky. 347 The taxes on licences are as follows : — $ Un a licence to keep a tavern . . . . . . . . lo If with privilege to retail spirituous or vinous liquors, or both . . . . . . . . . . . . loo If with privilege to retail malt liquors . . . . 5° If with privilege lo retail si)irituous, vinous, and malt licjuors .. .. .. .. .. ..150 On a licence to retail spirituous or vinous liquors, or both 100 On a licence to retail malt lif|Uors . . . . . . 5° On a licence to retail spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 50 The licence is valid for a year, and is not assignable. The County Court has power to grant licences to keep taverns, but may not grant a licence to anyone who has not paid the licence tax, or who is of bad character, or who docs not keep an orderly house, nor unless the Court believes the applicant is prepared with houses and stabling,* bedding and provender, to keej) an orderly, law-abiding- tavern. The Court must also be satisfied that the keeping of a tavern at the place proposed is necessary for the accommodation of the public. The licence is liable to be revoked for cause. The County Court is to fix the prices to be paid in taverns for liquor, lodging, stabling, &c. The privilege to sell spirituous liquors is not implied in any licence to keep a tavern, or other place of entertainment, unless it is so specified. A licence-holder who furnishes liquor lo a known inebriate is liable to a fine of $20 ; and, if notice forbidding the supply of liquor to such person has previously been given, a relative is entitled by action to recover " not less than a like amount." Any person who, not being licensed, sells in any quantity wine or spirituous liquors for consumption on the premises is deemed guilty of keeping a tippling-house, and is to be fined $60, or, if he keeps it for three months at a lime, $200. Any person who, without lawful authority, sells by retail any vinous or spirituoufi liquors is liable to be fined $20. * The provision as to stabling does not apply to cities or towns having over 15,000 inhabitants. 348 American Liquor Laws. \ \ I I \ \ 1 A tine of $50 is prescribed for selling or giving iicjuor to an infant. A Local Option IJiil, intended to supersede the existing Statute* dealing widi that sul)ject, was introduced at the Session of 1893, and in March was still l)efore the Legislature. As I was given to understand that it was likely to pass with- out important alteration, I give the following summary of its provisions : — On application of a number of voters in each precinct of the territory t be affected, equal to 25 per cent, of the votes cast at the last general election, the County Court Judge is to cause an election to be held on the proposition whether or not spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors shall be sold, bartered, or loaned therein, or whether or not any prohibition law in force by virtue of any general or special Act shall become inoperative. The area for which the vote may be taken is any county, city, town, district, or precinct. If the majority is against liquor none may be sold, bartered, or . loaned on pain of a fine from $100 to $200 for each offence ; but this prohibition does not extend to any manufacturer or wholesale dealer who, in good faith and in the usual course of trade, sells by wholesale in quantities not less than five gallons. Druggists also, unless they have been specially included in the reference to the electors, are excepted so far as regards the sale for medicinal purposes on a medical prescription. Physicians are subject to penalties for improperly prescribing intoxicating liquor, and the druggists are required to keep accurate registers of all sales of liquor, and to preserve every such prescription for twelve months. * !)>• this Act, passed in 1874, the County Court Judge, on petition from twenty voters in any civil district, town, or city in his county, was requirid to cause an election to he held on the question whether or not spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors should be sold in such district, town, or city. If the majority was against the sale, any person selling was to be fined from $25 to $100 for each offence ; but the prohibition did not extend to sales l)y wholesale, nor to sales by druggists for medicinal purposes on a medical prescription. A physician improperly giving such a prescription was liable to a fme of $25. An election under this law might not be held oftener than every two years. Kentucky, 3-19 If at an elect on held for an entire county the majority vote for licence, this vote is not to affect any town or portion of the county in which the sale of liquor has previously been prohibited by local option vote or special Act, unless (in the case of a local option place) the majority of the votes cast in the place itself are in favour of licence. A local option vote is not to be taken more frequently than once in three years, nor within thirty days of any regular political election. All saloons must be closed, and all traffic in and giving ot liquor is prohibited on the day of a local opiion election, under penalty of a fine of $ioo. No official returns are made showing to what extent local prohibition is in force. I understand that, geogiaphically, more than one half of the State is under prohibition, the rural precincts having widely adopted it, as well as some towns. Among the latter, the vote in some cases is apt to swing to and fro between "wet" and "dry"; but in the centres of population the liquor interest generally prevails. The "coloured" vote is an important element in the disposal of this question ; and the negroes usually incline to vote for whisky. Although many and various expedients have been adopted for keeping down the negro vote, yet on issues where the white population is strongly divided, as it is on the saloon question in the towns, it has a weighty influence in fixing tlie majority. Jn Kentucky, as probably in all the old slave States, the opposition to the saloon is largely due to a sense of the specially dangerous effects of liquor on the coloured population, and to the crimes of violence to which it is apt to lead. 'J'he com- paratively scanty immigration from the European countries to the South results also in fewer saloons and a less active resistance to anti-liquor legislation. Though adopted, territorially speaking, in so large a part of the State, local prohibition does not affect nearly the same proportion of the population. It operates chielly in the rural i ( I 35° A.yr/:iiiCA.\ IjqU(U< A.iirs. districts in the South, where there are most negroes, and wlicre the necessity of kcei)ing down the traffic for tlie causes already mentioned is most generally felt. 'I'hat it has had the effect of wiping out the "cross-road doggery" is considered by many to be its chief merit ; and the opinion apj)ears to be strongly held that, while it may not have much affected the private use of liquor, its results have, on the whole, been beneficial in country districts. T did not, however, find evidence of much success in places where resistance to the law was at all per- sistent, and the opinion was more than once expressed to me that, exce[)t in purely rural communities, prohibition was not usually well enforced, though the conditions varied locally according to the strength and direction of the local sentiment. il So?ff/i Carolina. A new departure in American licjuor legislation was taken by the Legislature of South Carolina in December, 1892, by the l)assing of a " Dispensary Law " which is said by its sup[)ortcrs to be an adaptation of the Swedish system to American methods and requirements — the principle being no liquor at all where it is not wanted, and, where it is wanted, no i)rivate profits on the sale, and security for the quality of the li(iuor. The new law has followed, and is, in part at least, the result of, an agitation carried on by the prohibitionists at the time of the State primary elections in 1892, when, through their action, separate ballot-boxes were put at all the polling- places for Democratic voters to cast a ballot on the question of prohibition. The agitation had derived strength from the lax enforcement of the existing law, especially in regard to the sale to drunkards and minors. On this vote the prohibitionists obtained a majority, but many voters took no part in it. The question had not been made a prominent issue at the election, and people had not been generally canvassed or roused on it.* * The total number of voters at the primary elections was 88,500, and ^•g^^ South Carolixa. .^51 When the Legislature met, several Hills were brought forward, the prohibitionists themselves urging a measure of complete State [)rohibition. The Act, as fmally passed, was a com- promise, but is by some regarded as a great step in advance, in the direction of a complete suppression of the trade. In more (quarters than one, liowever, found indications that the cause of temperance was not the only motive which oi)erated for the passing of the new law. It was, as I was assured, to a very great extent a financial measure, designed to increase the revenue of the State by adding to it the profits of the li(|uor trade ; and the Act itself, of which a summary follows, shows that, if fairly enforced, the authorised profits would be about 100 per cent, on the original cost of all litpior consumed in the State, less the expenses of administration ; which profits would be apportioned — one-half to the State, one-fourth to the county, and one-fourth to the municipality. It w.is carried by the party in power, for whom it attracted support from the i)rohibitionists, and also from those whose chief aim was to aid the revenue, which, owing to a falling off in the income derived from the phosphate-workings, and from railroads and other causes, required fresh sources of contribution. 'i'he following is a summary of the main provisions of the new dispensary law, which itself occupies ten closely-printed pages. The State board of control, consisting of the Governor, the Comptrollcr-Clcncral, and ihe Attorney-General, is to appoint in each county a county board of three persons, "believed" (by the State board) '"not to be addicted to the use of intoxic idng liquors."' It is the business of these county boards to appoint dispensers of liquor. The Act declares that "there may be one county dispenser appointed for each county, except the city of Charleston, for the county of Charleston, where there may be ten dispensers ; and about 70,500 of them voted on pr()hil)ition, for which there was a majority of about 10,000. ! \t ;^52 Am ERIC. I .V fjouoK T, I irs. (ixccpl for the city of Coluinbia, for llic coiiiily of Ki( Iil.ind, wluro there may he llir( c (lis|nnscrs .i|)|)ointe(l." There is, however, a proviso that, " in the jiid^nnent of the (ounly hoard of control, other dispensaries may be established in olh(;r towns in any county." Apparently, therefore, there is no hmil on the number of (hspensaries, except in (,'harleslon an f'ate, staling the a.L;e and residence of the signer for vhon) and whose use the li(|nor is recpiired, the (|uantityand kind retpiested, and his or lur true name and residence, and, where numbi.ri'(l, by street and nund)er, if in a city ; and the re(|uest shall be signed l)y the ap|)Iicant in his own true name and signatur*', attested by the county dispenser or his clerk, who receives and hies the retjuest, in his own true name and signature and in his own handwriting. Hut tin; request shall be refused if the county disptjuser tilling it perT(jnally knows the * Chiirlcston has a population of 55,000 ; l»ut i do not know what is the number (jf freehold voters. It seems likely, however, that applicants for the i)ost of dispenser of Iif|u.*r in ( 'liarlestoii will n(.ee business it is to purchase pure li(|uor (;^ivin;^f the preferenc(; to maiudacturers and brewers doin.; business in the Stale-), and sell it to the' county dispensers at a prii e not (^xceetliii;^ 50 per ceiil. :d)ove t!ie net cost. 'I'lii-. piovision, however, does not apply to beer shipped in ( ases, or bottles thereof sliip|)ed m barrels. No li(|Uor ^except beer) is to be brou^dil int(» the .St.ile. or transport! (I within it, otherwise tliin m a package bearni;^ .1 certih(ale witi) the si;^nature and ^v.\\ of" the .Slate ( onunissioner, a lecpiirenu-nl whi( h carriers aie bound under a penally of $50; to observe."" Manufacturer;) of di-,lilled, malt, or vinous li(|uors, doin;.'^ busi- ness in the .St;iU', are allowed to sell to no one in the .Slate e\( 1 pi the conuni-isioner, and he is to sell < .l\' to the county (hspeiiseis in pn seems to he douhtdil in vir.v of pitvitiiis (Iceisioi.s rts[ieHlin}; the rcj^ulatioii of iiUii Stiiti- coiniiurc e. X \ 354 AmI.KICAN /JiU'OR L/lll'.S\ llioic ol sak'-, hy the dispensers, after |).'iyinciit of expenses, ;ir(? e(|u,illy (li\ idod l>el\vceii tin; coiiil)' and llie imiiiicipality. Severe penalties are ena( led a^^ainsl all roncerned who may be gniliy (;f disobedience to llie la'.v. An)()ne conceined in kee|)inj^ a "clul> rocnii or other [Ad(v in which any intoxicating litpiors are rcrcive 1 or kept for the piirjjose of barter (jr sale as a be\'era^<', or for dislribulitni or division ainoii;; the members of any < lub oi- as-iO( ia'.ion by any means whatever," is to be pimished by a Imv. of $100 to $5'^^^, and imprisonment three to twelve months. A place where liipior is illej;ally sold m,iy be declared a nuisance fthrouj^di pioceedin^s taken before a jud^^e in cpiity;, and may be ( losed, and a i)erpelu:il injui^ction may be obtained. The (io\ernor is authorised to appoint .State constables for the enforcement of the law. t A ])eiirs.d of the ( laiiscs of this slalulc siiL^gcsts a doubt whether it is likely l(j |)rovf llic V( iii( Ic for a salislactcjry or |)erinaiienl seltlenienl ol the (iiiestion. I'elwccii the date of its passing and that at which it came into ojicratioii, attcM)|)ts wcri' made lo (A'crthrow it on te< lini( al grounds, but its validity as a consliliilional nieasinc was, 1 believe, upheld. 1 loinid. however, that grave doubts were entertained whether it would be |)ossil)le lo enforce it in some parts of the Stale, especially in Charleston; and many of the i)roliil)ilionisls tlicMMselves seemed by no means lo favour it even as a step in the riglil direction. In ( 'barleslon there is an active trade in li'jUor, and it was exjjcc led that the ne^' law would there cncoimter nun h op|)osition. An ex mayor of that city told mc that during his term of oIVk e he had attemi)led to gel the Sunday ( losing law enforced, but loimd the task impossible. Juries woidd not ( (»nvi< t, many cases could not even be got lo trial the grand jmies refusing to indict. The attempt had to be aband(jned, and the aulliorilies have since been (obliged lo content themselves with re<|uiring the front doors lo be closed, leaving customers U) find admission by the side chjor. The sudden closing of the bar-rooms, and of the whole trade, I Die. <<{){ r Sou/'// Ca/o>/./.v.i. 355 except tlir()U<^h tlic State dispensaries, would, it was thouglit, lead tf) trouble, evasion, and not improbably if any active steps were taken to enforce the law -to serious resistance, it seemed certain that the li([Uor-sellers in (Charleston would ado|)t every ex|>eilit'nt to render the law inoperative, and l)revious experience did not encourage a confident exi)e( 1 1- tion that the o|)position to it would be effectively broken down. One who h id loni^' resided and held olt'icial positi<;ns in this Slate told me that, with the inauguration of the dis- pensary system, he exi)ected to see a large trade carried on ui different parts of the State with the nearest points in (leor^ia and North (,'arolina ; and by sea whisky, he said, could nut be kei)t (jut. It might be concealed as dry goods, or in a himdred ways, but it would ( ome. When 1 was in ("harleslim 1 lieard the (jpinion more than once expressed that no long time would elaj)se before the new law was repealed. In some jKirts of the State, and especially in the north, the j)rohil)i- tionists were, in the spring, vigorously agitating the (juesticjn, and the clergy were impressing it on j)eople as a religious duty to refuse to allow the establishment of a (lisj)ensary. What turn the jxjlitical (piestion would take seemed un- certain; but it apjjeared to be not unlikely that the [)art) ui l)Ower would lose the suj)p(;rt of the |)rohibilionists, who, it was thought, would not improbably run candidates of their (jwn for the governorship and other offices. The development of the licpior (|uesti(;n in this State (as in others) will greatly depend on general political issues. The disj)ensary law contains a saving lor all existing laws prcjliibiting the sale of litpior in any i)art of the State. A general local option law was enacted in i-SS2 allowing the dir''.:t veto in any incorpc^rated city, town, or village. Outside of these incorporated places the issue of li( ences was altogcthtT forbidden by a law of i SSo ; but several (ounties were, b) sub- secjuent Acts, exemi»ted from this provision. Onwards from the year 1.S75 many special Acts were p'assed i)rohibiting the X 2 35^^ Ami-ink AN Lioudk Laws. \ I sale (jf li(|iif)r iK-ar (IhirIils, places of cflucalion, .'iiid factories. Ill iSyS a general |)r(>liihition was enacted on tlie sale of li(|iior within a mile of any plac e of worsliij) or education out- side a ( ity, t(nvn, or \illa^e (save in two ( onnties wlii( h were subsequently excei)ted). 'I lie folU;win!4 sijccial legislation has been enacted in recent years: — 1879 82. Special A( ts placed Iwenty-scvcn towns under pro- hibition, some ol which have since abandoned it. lacpior-sellin^' was also forljidden in the neighbourhood of certain factories. 1883. iiarnwell ccmnty went under prohibition, but the Act was repealed in 1886. iconce county did the same ''with a saving for mamifac:turersj ; repealed in 1885. 1882 84. I'r(jhibiti(jn in seventeen towns, one or more of wiiich afterwards repealed it. 1882. Act of incor[)oration of the town of .Shiloh ; retail liquor licence not to Ijc less than .$2f;/joo. 1885 — 87. I'rohibilion in hftcen towns, and near s(jmc cotton mills. 1886 — 88. Lo( al option as to sale in the incorporated cities, towns, and villages in hve counties (subject in two of them to a petition being presented by a majority of owners of real estate). 1888. I'rohibilion in six towns. 1889. Sexeral j)rohibitory places withdrew the right of drug- gists to sell as medical prescriptions. 1889. i'rohibilion in ten towns. 1890. Prohibition in Marlljoro' cf)unly and in si.xteen towns. 1891. Prohibition in Wdliamsburg county and about eighteen small towns. In another town prohibiti )n for ten years. On the wlifjle I was givc'ii I*; iindersland that mA very many t (umties were under lo< al |)rohil)ition ; some wlii( h had adoi)ted it had given it ujj ; and the general standard of en forcenient was not high. " iilind tigers" were said to be Mumcrotis ; and one resident in the State expressed to me his (onvic tion that nnu b intne drinking went on in country dis- tricts than many people supposed, both at home and in the bar- rooms of country towns, where lie bad seen inuen druiikennes.s. r '{ \ i SfHJTII CaKDI.INA. 357 I lie nienli(jiu,'(l that in one rounty in this State, which went under proliihition, sh()|)kee[)ers put U]) jars of coloured (luid in their windows, cahin;^ themselves druggists, and sold liquor to all comers lor "medicinal jjur[H)ses " ; ijrohibition there was worse than usc-lcss ; while the raisiiiLi; of the ques- tion and the takin,!j, of the lofal ojdon vote had stirn'd n|) ill-feeling, divided lamihes, and led, in not a lew cases, to seri(;us quarrels. All the towns under |)rohil)ition are small; not one, T believe, has a population anuMuiting lo 3,000 ; most o! them have much less than that number. 35« CHAPTER XIX. OrilKR SI'AiKS. New York. Tme ]i(|uor question in New York State hardly appears to 1)C in a condition offering much for the guidance of legislators attempting to deal with this rjuestion. The litjuor trade is exceptionally jjowerful in New York City, and that city has a pre[)onderating influence in the State. Proposals dealing with some |)art of the subject are re[)catedly brought forward in the Legislature, some of which become law, but the treatment of such matters is affected by i)olitic;d and i)arty considerations v.'hich it would be long and tedious, and for the present purpose (I believe) little ])rofitable, to discuss. A high-licence measure has at least twice i)assed through both Mouses of the Legislature, and been vetoed by tiie (lovernor; but the high licence party are still in the field, and ho[)e in time to win their cause. A consolidating Act was i)assed in 1892,* which embodies the greater [)art of the law now in force on the subject in this State. The licensing authority in every city and town in the State is a i)Oard of Excise Commissioners ; but in towns they are elected at the annual town meetings,t while in cities they are appointed by the mayor, or fas in New York City and Brooklyn) nominated by the ma)or, subject to confirmation by the Board of Alclerinen. An applicant for a licence must be a citizen of the United States, resident in the State, and be of good moral character approved by the lioard. * Chapter 401 of the Laws of 1^92, enlitled "An Act to revise and consolidate the laws regulating the sale of intoxicating lifjuors." f "Towns" includes the rural sub-divisions (t(jwnships). I I NJ:W \'ORh'. 350 Six kinds of lironrcs aic reco^^niscd b) llie Act— I. I lolcl, on and off. 2. Saloon, on and off. 3, Saloon, liecr, on and off. 4. Stoic, off. 5. Druf^'.ciist, off. 6. Additional, for open in}.; between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. In cities of over 30,000 inhabitants a refusal by tlie IJoard to j^rant a licence may be reviewed upon a writ of ci-}i/<>r(irr\ and the court may comi)(.l the issue of the licence if it determines that the application was denied arbitrarily, or without good and valid reasons. On conviction of certain offences the hccncc is //.sv /'"/'^ void ; the I')Oard of Excise also may revoke a licence on a second (in some cases on a first) conviction, subject to appe.d by (•rr/ioni)/ ; and the lioard is bound to he.ir romplaints of violations of the law by a licensee, and, on proof, < anrel his licence. The law of iS(;2 recognises the direct veto b) (iiMtinLj that the fore^-oini!; i)rovisions are not to apply to any town where the majority of voters vote for local prohibition ; but no ])rovision ai)])ears to he made for tlie lakin.i; of such vote. ;\s a matter of fact local option has h ' some operaticjn in the State Ihront^h tlie action of Hoards c \ 1 e ('ommissioners elected willi a view to the refusal of all licences. I endeavoured to ascertain to what extent this had taken place; but I was not able to obtain any official or precise information. I was, however, informed by a i^eiUlcman \\hi) took interest in the matter, on the ])rohil)ition side, that it would be safe to reckon 150 "dry" townships in the State. Another reckoned llie number to be from 100 to 150.* The rules of the Hoard of I'.xcise for New York City })rovide that no licence for a bar room will be issued for a new place e.\cei)t on the closing of an existing place. Ap])lication for a new licence must have the consent of the owner of the property, and it must be shown that the re(iuiremenls of the neighbourhood demand it, or that it will serve the [>ublic * Ithaca (the scat of Cornell University) has lately for the first time refused all licences. I heard of another place which had )Ust reopened saloons afttr being " dry " for thirteen years. 360 Amekuas /./nroh- /..iirs. ( oiucnicncc. A new pl.ic <• will not he lici'usi d In llic iin mediate vicinity oi a < liiirc li, s( li'iollionse, li()S])il.il, f)ras)liiMi. A lliiid roiiut will not Ix- li( niscd lor a ncs<;ii|iliiiii 1)1 I ,ii ciii 1: IImI.I. Cl.'iss I IJijUors. liccr ;iiiil wine , 1, I'.ciT only ... ... ,, 5 Heir ;ui(l wiru- only ,, (> l\cslniir;iiil ... ... ,, 7 .''ilc'inili'iat ... ... ,. S I Otnl (in-Iicciiccsf Olf-Ud-iu.'s : .Storelsci'pcis, (JIass 4, (iradc A >) ( : I) Total ofr li('cn<(.'s Af^juc^alc, on and od .. N iiiii'.ir iif I .ii I'll' f xW.v, I W.',. $ 1 1'< loS 250 '.W •54 20(j 5,S62 5-«S7 2fXj 222 i<;/| .5'-» •..^<'7 1,200 .S" lis 152* loo 42 .S^> 5" 7, So.) 7,7S7 41 27 i.S'' 42 \i l(.»o S<)2 1,010 .so 071 I,'.r)S; X,7So S,SS5§ * Under a rc.'staiii.int-liceinc no \)\\\ is ])(;rmitlcd, and li'|uor niiiy he S{;ivcd will) food only, 'riicir were, in 1SS9, 575 oilier rcstauianis, where a har was |/^' '"''I 9,327, and the receipts $i,5oi,5NK. ;^6i Ihf r((tii)ts for li( tn< cs wiTc $1,4^0,420 in i.SSS, .-ind $1,. 142, 770 ill i.S.S(;. hi iSS.S, i1k- r.oiird licM 1,177 trials in cxaiiiinatifjii of ( oiiiplaiiits lor vKjlalioii ol llic Isxcisc I -aw, of which 940 wrrc; upon coiiiplainls attains! prisDiis hil'hni; \n'.v.r anil wine lifcnccs, lor scllinjj; spirits, '' aii'l 107 w« re against slorcki'(.'p"TS rhirL!;i-- .1 u/:k/('.i.v /./i>i'(>A' L.iirs. more lii^lily taxed than the same premises would he without a licence. ('onse(|uently the re(hi(tion of saloons would nuiin an in( rease of taxation to tlie general jJubhC, unless indeed if were combined with the adr^plion of a lii-^her licence fee. 'I'houj^h beer licences are bein;^ rejilaced by general licences, 1 was told, by one who should know, that beer has in recent years ( ome into increased consumj)tion in New N'fjrk, the Irish takini; to it. y\ very com|)lcle record is ke|)l at the office of the lloiird of j'Acise of all matters relating to each licence holder ;iiid li( ensed house, with lull indices lor ready reference. A member of the Hoard ol I'Acise exj^ressed himself to me in terms stron,L;ly laxour.iblc to the faiL^lish system of attachinj^ the licences to the premises, on the j^round that it ^ives a better control. A house will command a hif^her rent as a salofjn than if let tor any other use. It is therefore the owner's interest (if the lici-ncc ;itta< lies to the house) to take care tli;it the licensee is a man of j;ood < haracter, who will ( omply with the law and not imperil the licence. The n.L^'ures in the lollowinLi; table are taken from the Re|)ort of the Police hepartment of New \'ork City (poj). 1,515,300). Sunday closing is not strictly enforced, A 11 est. 74.? .^■1-'o (j'975 "" Sunday) (j, 160 on .Sunday) S.1,556 90.124 3.525 409 1 4-737. 1 ^> I New York. l<^h The folIowiiiLj fif^nircs are for I'rooklyn (poj). (SoTjt^oo) :-— l8'>n. i8c>i. Arrcsl^ yy) Violiition of ICxcisc Laws 69 All offences 3«-.J'4 37-3'9 licences issiieil... 3-')S9 Si relief til of ])()li(:e 1.250 I -3 "9 CofiHcr/ifKf. TIu; following arcoiint of the liccnre law in ('onneetieiil, by the lion, h'rancis Waylniid, LL.I)., Dean of the I-aw School at Vale, < lenrly tlesrrihes the lea(lin<; features of the A' A/CA'AXSAS. 367 "At every general election the voters of each county decide whether or not the county shall grant a licence to saloon-keepers. At the election in September, 1892, one-third of the counties in the State voted against licence, as follows : — Ashley. Bradley, Calhoun, Cleveland, Columbia, Dallas, Drew, Franklin, Fulton, Grant, Hot Spring, Izard, Johnson, Lawrence, Lonake, Madison, Marion, Polk, Pope, Saline, Sharp, Union, Van Buren, and Washington. " Licence for dramshops is denied if a majority of the adult citizens within three miles of a church or school-house petition the County Court, remonstrating against it. This is the second way by which the sale of liquor may be prohibited. "The third and most effective scheme by which the saloon may be shut out of a community is by special act of the Legislature. Special laws of this character have been enacted since 1883, and none of them have been repealed. No matter how numerously signed the petition may be praying for the repeal, ttie Legislature always refuses to obliterate the circle within which the sale of the ardent is prohibited. " During the present session of the Legislature two Piills were introduced asking the repeal of Local Option Laws. The first concerned Jonesboro, the county seat of Craighead County. Hon. Emmet Rodgers, an active, intelligent, and energetic young jour- nalist, was elected Representative from the county by a majority of almost two to one, the issue in the primary canvass being the question of the repeal of the four-mile law at Jonesboro. enacted by the Legislature of 1887. Mr, Rodgers was in favour of the repeal of the law. In the formation of the House committees, Mr. Rodgers was made chairman of the Committee on Temperance. He brought to the Legislature a petition signed by nearly all the citizens of Jonesboro and vicinity affected by the law, asking for its repeal. The House, after considering the question an entire afternoon, defeated the Bill. Mr. Rodgers resigned the chairman- ship of the committee a few days ago. He said he believed in local self-government ; was in favour of recommending the passage of bills prohibiting the sale of intoxicants within localities where the majorities of citizens desired such laws, and was also willing to make similar reports upon Bills to repeal such laws when desired by a majority of citizens and taxpayers. He believed the rule should be allowed to work both ways. •'The second case in which the Legislature declined to repeal one of these Acts was that in which Batesvillc, Independence f i! I 368 Ami.rican Liquor Laws. I I 1 CouiUy, was interested. This law prohibits the sale of intoxicants within three miles of the Arkansas College, located in that town, and was enacted by the Legislatm'c of 1891. Since that time a couple of fruit distilleries have been established near Batesxille, and a majorit)' of the citizens came to the conclusion that if they could only throw off tlie shackles of prohibition times would be enlivened in their midst, and instead of the blind tiger a few saloons might be established in the town from which the county and municipality might derive considerable revenue. Much time was consumed in discussing the Bill, which finally suffered defeat like the Jonesboro measure. '• In about one-half of the territory in the State of Arkansas the sale of intoxicants is prohibited. In addition to the twenty-four counties which voted against licence at the September election, Local Option Laws are in force at the following places, the limits averaging from three to ten miles." [Here follow the names of about fifty [)laces.] "Thirteen Bills prohibiting the sale of licpior in as many localities have been introduced in this Legislature, nine of which have passed, the remainder being on their second and third readings. Should all the Local Option Bills now pending become a part of the statutes, which they undoubtedly will, the territor}- in Arkansas in which the sale of whisky is prohibited by special Acts v.ould extend o\er an area aggregating about 3,927 square miles. The counties which refused to vote for licence last September contain 18,950 square miles. This added to the number of square miles in the territory made prohibition districts by special legisla- tion gives a total of 22,877. There are 53,850 square miles in Arkansas, of which 22,877 are under prohibition rule, and in 30,973 whisky is allowed to be sold. Not less than 10,000 of the latter include swamps and inaccessible territory, and if absolutely correct figures could be obtained it could be shown that over one- half of the State of Arkansas was under control of the pro- hibitionists. More Bills affecting the liquor interests were intro- duced in this Legislature than on any other subject. The dealers, both wholesale and retail, are much alarmed over the drift of legislation, and during the coming two years they propose to organise and have something to say as to who shall be members of the next Legislature in order to stem the tide which threatens to engulf their interests,"' Texas. 369 Texas. The Constitution of 1876 requires the Legislature of the State to pass a local option law. That law provides as follows: — The Commissioners' Court for each county, - .vhenever thev deem ,t expedient," may order an election to be held for the county or for any justice's precinct, town, or city therein ; and thev are bound to order an election when petitioned by 200 voters of tiic county or 50 voters in any justice's precinct, town, or citv \ subsequent election is not to be held in less than two years • but a failure to carry prohibition in one area does not orevent 'a vote bem- taken in another area, wholly or partly including the former Conversely, however, where prohibition has been adopted in a larger area, a vote for repealing it cannot be taken in a smaller area contamed in it. The penalty for illegal selling iu a prohibition area is a fine rom :i,2, to $roo and imprisonment tsventy to sixty davs • for keeping a blind tiger, imprisonment two to twelve months i J fine -l^ioo to $500, and a separate offence for each day. " Blind tiae,- " IS defined to mean "anyplace in which intoxicating liquors'are sold by any device whereby the party selling or delivering the same is concealed from the person buying or to whom the same is delivered." -^'"u^, i^ The licensing law fixes the following liquor taxes :— State tax. J' $ 300 200 300 50 Sale of liquor by retail (less than one quart) (one quart and less than five gallons) (five gallons and upwards) ... (malt liquor only) Commissioners' Courts of the several cou'nties ma> le'w an additional tax equal to one-half the State tax. Incorporated cities and towns may levy an additional tax equal to that levied by the Commissioners' Court. A year's taxes must be paid in advance. Every dealer has to enter into a bond of $5,000 * with at least * The validity of this requirement has been sustained by the Unite<^\)i\ Hickson, Knight ; Herbert S. McDonald, Esq., County Court Judge ; Edward F. Clark, Escj., of Toronto ; George Auguste (iigaull, of St. Cesaire ; an I the Rev. Joseph McLeod, D.U., of Fredericton, N.B., are appointed commissioners for the purpose of obtaining for the information and con- sideration of Parliament the fullest and most reliable data possible, respect- ing, first, the effects of the liquor traftic upon all interests affected by it in Canada ; second, the measures which have been adopted in this and other countries with a view to lessen, regulate, or prohibit the traflic ; third, the results of these measures in each case ; fourth, the effect that the enactment of a prohiljitory liquor law in Canada would have in respect of social conditions, agricultural business, industrial and commercial interests, of the revenue requirements of municipalities, provinces, and of the Dominion, and also as to its capability of efficient enforcement ; fifth, all other information bearing upon the question of prohibition. f In the spring of 1893 the Commission had extended its investigations into Kansas, and was subsequently in Maine. Canada. 375 it was adopted in sixty-tliree counties and cities. It is now in force in only tliirty, of which twenty-four arc in the Maritime Provinces. Nova Scofiii. Taking these provinces first, we find that in Nova Scotia, with eighteen counties and one city, the Act was adopted by thirteen counties, and is now in force in twelve (Colchester county having abandoned it). Practically, however, prohibition is the rule throughout nearly the whole of the province, in counties where the Act has not i)een adopted as well as in those in which it is in force, seeing that, outside the city and county of Halifax,* no licence is, in foct, issued, and whatever retail trade in intoxicants exists is illegal. A summary of the licence law of Nova Scotia will be found on p. 400, from which it will be seen that in those parts of the province where the Scott Act is not in force the liquor traffic is regulated by a provincial Licence Act |jassed in i886, authorising the issue of, first, hotel licences ; seco?id, shop licences ; and, tkirJ, wholesale licences (as to which latter a question of u/ira vires has been raised). The signatures of two-thirdsf of the ratepayers in a district have to be obtained before a licence can be granted ; and the effect of this require- ment (which existed also in the old law prior to 1886) has been that in many counties no licence has been issued for twenty or thirty (in the case of Yarmouth fifty) years. The Act of 1886 abolished saloon licences, providing only for sale in hotels to bona fide guests, and in shops in quantities not less than a pint for off-consumption. The Provincial Secretary has stated in an official memorandum that the prohibitionists who secured the passing of this legislation admit that it has not fully succeeded * In Halifax city (population in 1891, 38,500) there are 67 shop and 30 hotel licences. In tha county outside the city only two licences are said to be issued. t In Halifax city three-fifths. 1 .-,! i ■ 1 i 76 Americ.in Liquor Laws. in stopping bar-drinking ; that it is said that there are as many bars as l^efore, and that pubHc opinion will not allow of full enforcement ; but that the prohibitionists attribute the failure to the fault of the olricials. In '•ural districts, where there is a strong temperance sentiment, he says that the Act is well observed.* The Royal Commission (already mentioned) commenced its in(|uiry in No>'a Scotia, where evidence was taken at various places during July and August, 1892. It would be hardly possible within the limits of this statement to attempt a complete summary of the evidence, even if a full report of it were available. The newspaper reports show that a great number of contradictory opinions were expressed by the friends and opponents of local option and prohibition, as regards both the past working of the existing laws and the possibility of successfully enforcing a general prohibitory law. The abolition of bars and the reduction in the number of licences in the city of Halifax does not appear to have reduced drunkenness —the convictions numbering in 1885, 608; in 18S6, 752 ; in 1887, 746; in 1889, 715; in 1890, 908. Unlicensed selling seems to have increased, and 106 cases of this offence came u[) between March, 1887, and November, 1889. There was also evidence that, since bars were made illegal, men would get a bottle of spirits from a shop and share it outside. In the province, generally, it seems certain that drunkenness has greatly diminished during the last thirty or forty years ; but opinions differ as to the share in this result attributable to restrictive law^s. Evidence, however, was given of the marked and steady growth of temperance for years before the Scott Act. The evidence as to the extent to which the law was successfully enforced was conflicting and inconclusive ; but from the positive statements of some witnesses it seems evident that in some, if not in most, of the towns drink is obtainable by * Parliamentary Paper C. 6,670, 1892. i "I- Caxad.l 377 anyone who wishes for it.* On the whole, however, there can be little doubt that the consumption is small ; nor (outside Halifax — perhaps not even there) does a great amount of drunkenness appear anywhere to prevail. Some witnesses favoured general prohibition on the ground that it would be more easily enforced than prohibition by local o[)ti()n. At Yarmouth (population, 6,000), where no licence has been issued for more than fifiy years, there seemed to be a good deal of drinking; the "bottle peddlers" being the chief cause of trouble. Out of 154 summary convictions in 1891, 76 were for offences connected with drink, and it was said that a great many more " drunks " were sent home than the number ar- rested. There a[)|)eared, however, to be considerable activity in Yarmouth in the enforcement of the law. i Nciv Bninsivick. Since the passing and rc[)eal of the i)r()hibilion law of ,55, New Brunswick has been subject to licence laws of onstantly-increasing stringency; the present Act wns passed )y the Provincial Legislature in 1887 (for summary, see p. 402). A committee of the Executive ('ouncil of the provmce has recently reported t " that, in communities where there is a strong public sentiment in favour of the Scott Act, it has worked well and has lessened in a marked degree the evils resulting from drinking in taverns ; this is true more i)articularly of country districts. In the larger towns and cities the Act has not been so well enforced, and the committee think it cannot * One who had recently been through tlie Maritime Provinces with the Royal Commission told me that he believed there was only one town throughout those provinces where drink could not be jiurchased. Tiiis was IMarysville, in New Brunswick, near Fredericton, the whole town being the property of a single owner who allowed no liijuor to be introduced. f Parliamentary Paper C. 6,670, 1892. 378 American Liquor Laws. be truthfully said that very beneficial results have, as a general rule, followed its adoption in such cities and towns, though, undoubtedly, an exception must be made in the case of one or two towns where the Act has been quite rigidly and success- fully enforced." One reason assigned for the fact that more satisfactory results have not ensued is the number of legal questions that have arisen. The committee declare them- selves unable, owing to the absence of statistics, to give any trustworthy information in regard to the diminution of crime. The Liquor Licence Act of 1S87, which is in force wherever the Scott Act is not adopted, is declared by this committee to be a very efficient licence law, the principal features being high licence, limited number, early closing on Saturday, and separation of the saloon from other kinds of business. The evidence taken before the Royal Commission was, as in Nova Scotia and elsewhere, inconclusive as regards the practical efficiency of the Scott Act. It was evident, however, that in some places it was very inetfective. At St. Stephen (population, 2,700), where the Act was adopted, 634 summary convictions out W" 763 since 1886 had been for drunkenness. In this place the following statistics were given : — 187s 1S76 1S77 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 No. of Licences 36 ... • . • 27 ... 19 ... 17 ... ... 15 ••• Scott Act Cust of Police. .*i?i,o6o 1,085 828 711 1,006 4' i II 10 I In 1882 no attempt was made to enforce the Act because of cases before the courts. It was said to have been better enforced in 1880 and 1881 than it had been since. At Fredericton (population, 6,500), the first place in Canada to Canada. 379 |i ^ ♦ adopt the Act, it appeared that a considerable amount of ilHcit selHng went on. The fines levied under the Act were as follows : — 1882 1883 1884 1886 1887 1888 1889 1S90 1891 ... §1,000 1,500 750 1,650 900 1,050 1,250 800 700 At Moncton (population^ 8,700) the corresponding figures were— 1S85 1886 18S7 1888 1889 I S90 1891 1892 (seven months) $ 40 950 1,050 2,000 1,800 1,650 1,900 Arrests at Moncton (about two-thirds being for drunken- ness)- 1S85 1886 1887 1888 1889 1S90 1 89 1 335 311 205 306 309 278 26; In New Brunswick (as elsewhere) the evidence before the Royal Commission testified to the prevalence of perjury and " defective memory " among witnesses in liquor cases. The statistics of convictions for drunkenness {see p. 394) show a higher number for New Brunswick than for any other province in the Dominion, except British Columbia. ii < 1 ;8o American Liquor Laws. Some further details respecting the Scott Act in New l>runswick will be given later in connection with the general (question of the effects of that Act.* Prince Edward Island. For twelve years, from 1879 ^o 1891, prohibition was the law throughout Prince Edward Island. In the latter year, however, the Scott Act was renounced by Charlottetown, where for some months there was free and unrestricted trade in li(|uor, the Legislature, which on the adoption of the Act throughout the island had repealed the old provincial licence law, refusing to re-enact it. In 1892 a strict police law was enacted, requiring the sale to be carried on in a single room only, open to the street, without blinds or any other obstruction to tlie view, and without chairs or other furniture, or back door ; and no other business e.\cej)t the sale of licjuor, oysters, and cigars was to go on in the same room. The law in Charlottetown is, therefore, free trade, subject to police regulation. 'I'his arrangement was said to work well, and to have put a stop to the traffic in bac k j)laces and grocers' shops. Tlie stipendiary magistrate was of opinion that the Scott Act had had no material effect on drunkenness, one way or the other. There had been 364 convictions for breach of the Act during nine and a half years while it was in force in Charlottetown (population, 11,300 in 1891). The following figures were given of lic[uor (spirits, wine, and beer) entered for consumption at Charlottetown : — 1 1887-8 1888-9 1889-90 n) to l)ectml;er, 1890 June, 1892 33.623 gallons. 30,357 ., 30,124 „ 43,012 ,, (imported 33.^35 gallons.) 43,370 gallons (imported 40,532 gallons.) * P.ige 396. Canada. 381 1 A portion of this amount went to the rural districts of the island. Such figures are not conclusive of the amount consumed in any place, as the liquor may he transported after it has paid duty, and can no longer be traced. At Summerside the evidence of the licensed vendor of liquors (for medicinal purposes, etc.) under the Scott Act threw some light on the manner in which this branch of the law was evaded. " Prescrii)tions " were given for various amounts, from a bottle up to ten gallons, some practically unlimited, the liquor being taken by instalments, as recpired. One order, undated, ran : — •*' Give bearer one bottle of whisk) . He pays." Another was for eight bottles of brandy. This w^itness thought his sales had averaged about $8,000 per annum. The Mayor of Summerside gave the following return of arrests for drunkenness in that town (population in 1891, 2,900) : — 1876 1877 1878 1879 1 880^ 1881 1882 1883 29 1S84 . 22 54 1885 • 37 60 1886 • 30 31 1887 • 30 16 1888 . 46 35 1889 • 43 12 1 890- 1 (i6 months) .. • 5^ 10 First year of Scott Act. The two following tables are taken from a Parliamentary paper, published in 1892 (C. 6,670) : — I. — Statement showing the number of cases tried at Summerside for offences against the Scott Act from 1879 (when the Act was first adopted in that town) to 1889; also cases tried for drunkenness since the incorporation of the town (from a return by the town clerk of Summerside) : — 3^2 AAfF.K/iwx / /QUOK Laws. OfTences against Canada Offences ag ainst Bye-laws relating Year. Temperance Act. to Drunkenness. Con- victions. Dismissals. Total. Con- victions. 34 Dismii ;als. Total. 1876 I 35 1877 f The Act was not in force ) 56 — 56 1878 I duriii" these years. ] 51 — 51 1879 ) i 31 - — _ 31 1880 5 2 7 19 3 22 1881 6 6 40 40 1882 24 9 33 ; 34 — 34 1883 10 5 15 9 — 9 1884 24 6 30 23 — 23 1885 18 7 25 17 — 17 1886 10 7 17 36 — 36 1887 19 I 20 25 — 25 1888 15 15 23 — ■ 23 1889 10 15 31 54 54 i 1 i i II. — A similar statement respecting Charlottetown (from a return by the clerk of the City Police Court, Charlottetown) : — Offences against Canada j Offences against Hye-laws relaiing Year. Temperance Act. 1 to Drunkenness. Con- victions. Dismissals. 1 Total. 1 Con- viction.s. Dismissals. Total. 1877 ^ f' 1 729 8 737 1878 1 The Act was not in force 357 13 370 1879 lUuini; these years. 231 4 235 1880 256 2 250 1881 19 3 22 193 4 197 1882 16 16 32 218 — 21S 1883 7 2 9 250 — 250 1884 48 41 89 229 I 230 1885 35 26 61 284 I 285 1886 34 20 54 299 I 300 1887 60 lOI 161 213 II 224 1888 79 III 190 262 — 262 1889 25 47 72 299 3 302 C.I X.IDA. ^^^ I 4 Quebec. In the province of Quebec the Scott Act was at different times adopted in six counties ; it is now in force in three only, Brome, Chicoutimi, and Richmond. The Prime Minister of the province, in a report dated 1889, remarked that the Act did not seem to have produced any influence on the amount of crime in the counties in which it had been adopted, and that in Chicoutimi ii was said to he a source of disorder, in so far that it led to the illicit sale of licjuors. The 'report continues : - In the province of Quebec, the most efficient prevention of intemperance and its consecpient evils is, as regards the Roman Catholic population, and especially that of French origin, the moral influence and vigilant action of the clergy. This exi)lains why the introduction of the Canada Temperance Act has been almost exclusively confined to the English and Protestant country."^ While the Scott Act has had only a restricted operation in this province, local prohibition has been adopted by bye-law (under the Dunkin Act) in many of the smaller municipalities, and is now in force in about 250 of such municipalities out of a total number of about 900.! Moreover, in 121 munici- palities, which have not passed a prohibitory byedaw, no licence is in fact issued. The Roman Catholic clergy are opposed to a general prohibitory law. They, however, appear to favour the passing of these bye-laws, which, it is said, are through their nifluence well enforced. It is common for the priest "to encourage young persons at their confirmation to take a pledge of abstinence till they come of age. * Parliamentary Taper C. 6,670, 1892. t For a summary of the liquor laws of the province of Queljec ?re p. 403. The figures in the text were supplied to me by the secretarV of the Dominion Alliance. il ;84 Am/':r/c.\x Liquor Laws. Ontario. In Ontario, a remarkable revulsion of feeling has been manifested with rei^ard to the Srott Act. In 1879 it was ad()i)ted by one county, and hi 1881 by another; in 1884 and 1885 a wave of prohibitory sentiment passed over the province, and votes in iavour of the Act were passed by these two counties and by twenty-three others — twenty-five in all out of the forty-one counties in the province. T>y INTay, 1889, the A( t liad been abandoned in all of them, as well ;!s m two cities, (iuelph and St. Thomas, which had adopted it. The four years, 1885 — 8, may be termed the Scott Act period, the Act being in force during those years, res})ectively, in nine, twenty-five, twenty-five, and seventeen counties. Prior to the adoption of the Scott Act, the Legislature of Ontario had passed a licence law, which with subsequent amendments is still in force, and of which a summary is given on p. 404. A feature of this law is the fact that it is enforced through provincial, and not municipal, machinery. Licences had previously been granted by the municii)al authorities, and to their officers had been entrusted the duty of enforcing the law. The result of this system was that those interested in the licjuor trade were brought to the front in local politics, and obtained such an undue share of power and infiuence as enabled them to control, in a great measure, the licensing authority and the executive officers of the law. The evils of such a system are seriously felt at the i^resent time in the province of Quebec, and especially at Montreal. The new arrangement in Ontario, providing for the appointment by the Provincial Government in each electoral district of three commissioners to grant licences, and an inspector to enforce the law, worked well on the whole ; and it is claimed that the efficient administration of the law, which resulted from its separation from the sphere of local })olitics, was steadily producing an improvement in the drinking habits of the Canada. 3^5 people, when the passing of the Scott Act ami the suhseciuenl action of the prohi'jitionists in regard to it led to luiforeseen changes. When the vScott Act was passed, the Provincial (Government of Ontario determined that, as the Act was a Dominion Act, and contained provisions for its own enforcement, it was the affair of the Dominion, and not of the provincial authority, to see to its administration. Accordingly, the commissioners and inspectors ceased to be api)ointed under the provincial licence law in places which adopted prohibition, and for a time the Act was in general very ineffectively enforced. Complaints were raised by the prohibitionists ; and the matter was pressed by them on the Provincial Government, who then consented to take steps for enforcing the Act. The commissioners and inspectors under the licence law were re-ai)pointed for the purpose of carrying out the prohibitory law, the prohibitionists being even invited to nominate ])ersons to fill these posts, and their nominees being appointed. Various causes are assigned for the entire break-down of the Act, and its abandonment by so many counties at the earliest possible moment after they had adopted it. One cause which is alleged is the injudicious zeal of the pro- hibitionists, and the opposition thence arising. An instance given me was that of the county of Halton, which was the first in this province to adopt the .Scott Act, and was regarded as the stronghold of prohibition, and the model for all other counties to imitate. The commissioners, the insi)ectors, and even the magistrate who tried the cases (without appeal), were nominated by the prohibitionist i)arty. The result was that such a revulsion sprang up in popular sentiment that it became impossible to obtain convictions. The inspector might walk into a place where liquor was being served and drunk before his eyes ; when the case came before the magistrate, witnesses would swear positively that no liquor was sold. Perjury was naked and unashamed. The inspector would be hooted as he I \ h 386 A ^1 ERIC AN Liquor Laws. entered and left the court, and the prohibitionists themselves would not stand up beside him or openly support the law. An examination of the returns of voting on the adojjtion of the Scott Act shows that in some cases the total vote cast was a small one, much smaller than the vote at ordinary elections. It is repeatedly said also that many of those who voted for the Act were not teetotallers, did not intend t(j become so, and had no sentiment in favour of prohibition ; but acted in obedience to external influences — their pastors, wives, or friends — and with no very definite idea of what they were voting for. I have no means of judging to what extent this may have been the case ; certainly there is a very common belief in Ontario that many votes of this class were given.* A prohibitionist, whom I asked how he accounted for the failure of the Act, gave me in substance the following explana- tion, which shows how intimately the working of a law of this kind becomes involved in the operations of political parties. The Liberal party, he said, having passed the licence law in Ontario, and having been in power for the past twenty years, those interested in the liquor trade have gravitated towards the Liberals as the dominant power, which it was better to con- ciliate than oppose ; and thus, contrary to the general experience elsewhere, the licensed victuallers are, for the most part, members of the Liberal party. 'I'hey, the Licence Commis- sioners, and the inspectors, had a good understanding, and agreed together in the fair administration of the law. When, by a wave of enthusiasm, the Scott Act was carried in many counties in the province, and it became the duty of the inspectors to enforce prohibition, a great deal of friction arose. i * I have repeatedly been informed that people voted for the Act who never intended to observe it; and a case was related to me of several such voters in Simcoe county who, shortly after they had helped to carry the Act, were discovered drinking in an illicit rum shop. People, I was told, were induced to vote by being assured that the Act would not affect t/wm. 1 Canada. 3«7 4 \ Either the inspector tried to do his duty, which was a difficult matter, the Hcjuor-seller, formerly his friend, becoming his bitter opponent ; or he let things go on much as before, in which case the i)rohibitionists were in arms against him. The Liberal party comi)rised three-fourths of the prohibitionists in the province, as well as most of the li([uor-sellers. Thus a feud sprang u]) in the party over the Scott Act and its execu- tion. The tlanger to the party's predominance thence arising, the irritation of the traders at the injury dune to their interests, and the disgust of the i)rohibitionists at the failure of the high hopes they had cherished of the benefits to ensue from the Act, all combined to bring about a strong reaction against it, and this resulted in its abandonment throughout the province. It has already been stated that, when the Canadian provinces were confederated, certain legislative powers being conferred on the Federal Parliament, a reservation was made for all then existing provincial laws, and that among these laws was one (generally known as the Uunkin Act) enabling munici palities in Ontario and Quebec to })ass bye-laws (subject to the api)roval of the electors) prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquor. A clause containing this law was subsec^uently in- cluded in the Licensing Act of Ontario, but after the passing of the Scott Act it was repealed. When the Scott Act itself fell into disuse in Ontario, a movement was started by the prohibitionists in favour of re establishing the bye-law clause. This proposal involved a constitutional question, whether the province, which was specifically vested with the power of regulating the liquor traffic, could legislate afresh for its suppression. This point has not yet been decided by the final court ; but the Provincial Legislature undertook to pass the clause, laying special stress on the fact that it was mereW the re-enactment of a law existing previously to confederation, and included in the general saving for pre-existing laws. It was also argued that if the Provincial Legislature could not legislate for prohibition it could not repeal a prohibitory law z 2 vss AmI'.ric \x Liquor F.aws. already existing, and that tlicrcfore the repeal of the old bye-law clause was ultra vires. Krom September, hSqo, to May, 1892, the [)rohil)itory bye- law had been adopted by popular vote in 24 munici[)alities in Ontario, out of 35 municipalities in which a vote was taken. In all other parts of the province the licence law is in operation. In Toronto (pop. 181,200) 150 tavern licences and 50 shop licences are issued ; the city appears to be orderly, and the Sunday closing and other provisions of the law are said to be well observed.* The following table, containing a complete return of com- mitments for drunkenness in Ontario during thirteen years, is taken from the Provincial Treasurer's annual report on the working of the Licence Acts. It shows to what extent the record was affected in the different counties which adopted the Scott Act. It will be seen that the ado[)tion of the Act was generally, but not always, followed by a diminution of com- mitments ; and, in the first year of the Scott Act period, there was a sensible falling off in the sum total for the whole province ; but in the last two years of that period the figures had begun to grow again. Allowance being made for increase of popula- tion, the figures for 1891, under licence, were, on the whole, more favourable than those of any year while the Act was in force. If the figures for the 25 Scott Act counties are taken se])arately, and the years 1886 and 1887 (when the Act was in force in ail of them) are compared witli 1890 and 1891, the yearly average number of commitments for the first two years comes out at 1,103, and for the last two years at 1,301, a difference of 200 in favour of the Scott Act period. ]]ut if 1890 is omitted, and 1891 taken separately, the figures for that * A prohibitionist in the State of Missouri, who had recently paid a visit to Toronto, spoke to me with enthusiasm of the condition of that place, where he had been obliged to go on foot to church (irrespective of weather and distance), and had foum^ great difficulty in obtaining medicine for his wife on Sunday. i u Canada. 389 Statcinc;it sliowing the numl)er of Prisoners C(jmmittcd for Driinkuiincss lo the County Gaols in Ontario (hiring cacli year from i.Syc; to 1 89 1. lyic figures in italics indicate cvniDntiucnts in years when the Scott Act 7vas in force. Coi'NTV OK DiSTKICT, 187.;. i Algoma I'rant (including Hraniforcl) ■ Hriice Carleton (including Ottawa) Duffcriti Kigiii (including St. Thomas) ... Essex Frontenac (including Kingston).. Grey Haldunand Halton Hastings (including HcllevilleJ ... Huron Kent I.ambton Lan.'irk Leeds and Grenvilie Lennox and Addington Lincoln (iiiclud. St. Catherine's).. Middlese.x (including London) ... Muskoka and J'arry Sound Nijjissing Norfolk Northumberland and Durham ... Ontario Oxford Peel Perth (including Stratford) Peterborough I'rescott and Russell Prince Edward Renfrew Simcoe Stormont, Dundas, & Glengarry. Thunder Bay Victoria and Haliburton Waterloo Welland Wellington (Including Guelph) ... Wentworth (including Hamilton) York (including Toronto) Total . 24 6< 8 273 54 59 126 35 10 I 34 15 33 i'5 8 7' 9 51 19;- 6 I 15 24 II 5S 27 35 5 o 46 ^ 82 17 81 10 28 188 23 382 1.359 3,581 1880. 1881. .882. '9 17 24 81 64 80 '. 14 4 2^^ 2'9 265 — I 53 45 61 71 5" 91 102 53 25 40 23 23 15 () 4 t 5 4 16 35 67 22 18 8 24 13 28 12<. 77 77 7 10 4 72 56 67 1 1 14 II 44 55 4' 2-5^ 210 242 8 3 13 I 2 26 14 18 25 20 10 6 2 5 54 47 32 14 9 14 39 26 20 27 -7 3B I 1 2 75 6u 76 10 10 24 107 62 5^' 3 4 7 «3 126 88 7 8 14 II II 10 186 145 5C 40 36 51 447 339 39^- 1,4^3 r.342 1.445 3.795 3.328 3.497 i88j. 21 75 10 261 o 92 121 46 19 7 7 57 5 23 75 9 19 18 65 269 o 10 18 21 10 28 4 37 71 2 70 17 87 8 296 7 14 34 93 376 1.485 1884. 15 5« ? 3 '4 I 8.' 103 75 28 7 6 5" 4 26 10^ 7 135 20 39 445 16 17 17 26 I 51 10 14 30 o 46 27 99 9 705 20 II 23 49 295 1,661 1885. 1886. 1887. 1888. 1889. 3,897 4,650 I 12 2?, 205 / 57 47 74 36 18 9 45 3 18 130 6 80 6 29 277 84 6 4 26 4 21 24 17 27 3 41 /I 3' 3 153 13 7 33 32 368 1,707 I 2 3 3"" 31 20 '5 /J 34 4 14 7^ 4 J6 3 21* 338- 39 o 6 U o 2S 10 15 13 I 54 2 35 I 119 I 4 40 12 385 1.705 85 128 112 1/7. b 2^ 2S0 297 3 «i 23 29\ 45 46! loS 107 21 29 17 24' 5 19 5' 67 o 4; 7 9 3S 64 9 4 24 3' 5 7 21 28 404 40S 8 6 13 32 J 3 6 /2\ o o\ o 64', S 24; 12 9 // J() O CI 20 45 2 O /6 28 4 7 148 148 2 4 8 12 32 12 22 21 373 420 2,166 2,098 2,096 64 218 8 396 4 23 47 139 27 23 13 39 2 61 99 2 52 4 33 54" 45 81 17 28 5 55 28 16 20 38 4 46 29 135 4 20 21 10 401 3,6263,555 4,13014,451 ■Siiitt Act period. 1890, 69 182 f 33f' 2 2t' 3! 129 17 15 9 49 i; 7' 108 5 58 2^ 24 332 28 97 3 38 2 5> 3c 14 45 c 33 I 34 25 125 7 17 16 ic 418 2,085 4.7'>7,4.573 1891 77 113 7 204 I 32 57 125 13 22 9 34 5 47 95 5 44 23 12 213 19 96 10 22 o 34 17 4 24 5 19 o 34 H 120 I 13 7 4 251 1.783 J.014 * The returns include the city as well as the county ; the Scott Act was adopted 1 the county cnly, exclusive of the city. The city of Brantford was first incorporated in 1886, a fact whicn may account for the increase of convictions concurrently with the adoption of the Act. 390 A Ml: K /<■ I.V 1. 1 1 ' i'( >R I. . I H'.\. I I year in llic sanic roimlics aro 1,072, showing an absolute ini[)roveniL'iU (even without allowance }(jr increase ot ixjpula- tion) as against the prohibitory peri(Kl. On the other hand, it should be noted that in the above figures are included the returns for the cities of Ottawa, Kingston, and I,ond(;n, which did not adoi)t prohibition, and in wliich a considerable though unasceitained improvement may probably have taken [jlactjp This fact would, no doid)t, render untrustworthy any [)ositive infereiK e unfa\()iiral>le to the Act based on the foregoing comparison . On tlie whole, however, no decisive conclusion in favour oi llie superiority of local prohibition U) other methods in checking drunkeiuiess durii^g any continuous l)erio(l seems to be warranted by the table, es])ecially if the increased number of commitments in the last two years of the Scott Act period are taken int(j account, together with tlv [)rogressive improvement which has more recently taken place under licence. Ma}iil()lni. Tn Manitoba the li(jUor trade is under a i)rovincial licence law passed in i. J) 392 American Liquor Laivs. has been a decrease of whisky-drinking in Canada, and a steady but not very large increase in the consumption of beer. Compared with other countries, the whole consumption is decidedly low. This table, and others following, were in part sui)plied to me by Mr. George Johnson, the official statistician to the Canadian (iovernment at Oltnwa, and in part are either based on figures supi)lied by him, or extracted from the Statistical Year IJook which is published by the I)ei)artment of Agriculture. Annual Consumi)lion per head of the undermentioned Articles, paying Excise or Customs Duties, in the respective Pro- vinces and in the Dominion from 1879 to 1891. ARS. 1 Ontario, yuebec. ! ' i N'ew liriinswic k. Nova Scotia. VI- . 1 1/ C oi « 1/1 1 d C13 •X •r v; J! -^ (rt vJ n '^ CJ .5 i. .s S a 4.. t: u c (U c '5. CO Calls. Is (lull. (;all. (Jails. Cinlls. Call. (2 Calls. i Calls. Galls. Call. h Galls. -5, Calls. 1 calls. (;all. H Calls. t;alls. 1879 i"404 3'2Sii'03o 471 I "072 I '660 '230 2-962 •756 •646,-059 1-46; •516 -767/053 1-34 1880 •708 3'478 •O2o'4'20 -869 I'sgS '183 2-65 1 •590 -4861-025 i-io ■43'5 ■519 '03' ''^l 1881 •936 3'548 '025 4'5o I "150 1-723 '236 3-10 ■753 -456, "044 1-25 ■527 -603 049 1-18 1882 I'oii 4*250 •o29 5"29 1-248 2-004 "276 3 "52 883 -6491 '049 1-58 ■539 -690 -062 1-30 1883 i'o75 4 '508 '037 5 '62 1-380 1-967 "304 365 , '932 -790: "058 178 ■579 -629 '063 1 -27 1S84 •987 4-519 •o30|5'53 1-271 2-067 ■265|3'6o •815 -805, '056 1-67; •573 -782 -061' I -41 S.2 ('1885 i*3J4 3"99o ■o28|5-35 rzii 1*952 243 3-40 ■753 "859 '"44 i-65i •536 -772 -054' 1-36 ^2 ) iS8(. •654 4-220 "020 4'89 •9202-207 -250 3-35 -560 -973 -044 T-57i •463 -807 '060 1-33 )i887 ■6S9 4-555 -020 5-24 1-027 2-578 -225:3-83 -578 -912 -032 1"52 '441 -634 -032 i-io C1SS8 •580 4-856 '022 5"45 •927 2-609 '235 3'77 -515 -927-036 i"47| •363 •897-038 1 -29 0"" u 1889 ' ■732 4'S52/o25 5-60 1 "080 2-544 -236 3 86 '605 -948 -040 I '59 •456 1-127 "047 1-63 w 1890 i - 1 - 1 - 14-78 — , — — i3'6i 1 — — — . 1-70 "" ™ 1 I'SO i Manitoba aiul 1'. !•:. isi.iiui. N. ^\■. Territorius. liritish Coin u )ia. Doiiriiiun. 1879 •609 •516 -036 I "16 ■814 1-851 ■072'2-73 ' i"3i9 3'349'5i9 5-68 1-131 2-209 -104 3'444 i88j •425 ■s-^' -oi4'i-oo •813 2-479 ■053 3 "34 ' I 'oio 3-187 '410 4-60 -7152-24S -077 V040 1881 '530 •381 •019 '93 •385 1-156 -QIO 1-55 ' 1-038 2-699 "4 '7 4'i5 - '? p ."■>,'«■ 00 "-> O S .8 .8 f r-~ On ■«>■ T VC> M N ■*■<)■" .8 .8 .Sn m in _Os _t^ _"!■ -4-0 O 00 in -Lj b 'w V^ in ro M - ? 00 rico CO H r^ 'o rooo 0) ro i: E* N in r^ 0\ oo ro ^ N " in 01 ro V > Oi ro Tf (N M - X C4 H H ■i inoo ■>!• ro N ~ -f On in NO NO 00 00 ir, ro On t>. N ro t-^ •»■ « oo ro ro '-I lOvO On H ft M M t^ ro ro .8 .8 .8 •*m oo NO inoo LO 01 M O M ■+ •* in 01 M M O ■« •* O in o -^ -"l- M « oo NO •!■ On in ro 0) >p « V) Co '« NO 0) I- ro On ro H 0) NO Tj- M I t-t ro in CO NC m •t ro M ro I^ \p .J- On ro 01 ro in ro H 04 CNi r^ i-o >-< O t^ ro IN FH NO lO H o> ro ro ON NO ro CJ >i 3j -• I B 00 ^ NO NO ON I OO 1-0 I t^ ro ro N ro in •>*■ TTOO t^oo M ro "^ 0) O in O ■»• On ro in " 0) On oo •-< in M 00 ro -^i- « r^ 1- O NO 0) " CO ro o< ►■ O * M in On 1- ro M ro 01 M 00 NO M M « M IH NO ■^ -^oo c^ O 01 ■^ CO 0) NO On -1- OnOO no >- NO ro O 00 ro On OnnO -"t t^ i/-( ro t^ T,- 00 -J- o 1- 0» M ON On f •>1- On 0) O On ro ro rOCO "I ■♦ O ON Tl- ■>*■ •* O in ro ►^ M t^ t-t r>. ON « 01 in ro 01 1- O oo 01 O m « M 11 O' t^ t^ in in i-t iH 01 inoo M in -h 01 iH On Th -J- w 1^ « ■«■ 0< NO t^ On fO 0) 1^ ro ■+ w r, O ti- ro ^ c CO On ■>*■ in NO r^ t-i t^ 01 NO 1- t-i O ro Onco ON O t^ NO 01 - ro ■* M 01 -l- 1-1 CO in 01 M t^ cj 00 r^ On On t^ 01 On ro ^ iH ro Tj-oo t-i 00 01 " ■^ 01 M M O 01 r^ " -j-oo 01 ro NO -I o -.j- t-t M in in ■^ 01 " M O rooo VO ro 01 w tj- 01 M O On t^ ■* 01 oo" 1 ' 01 M « N N M On 00 ro ^ in in *no 01 00 ro 01 ►- 01 M M t-^ rv ro l^ c>NO ro ON M CO ro 01 m" ro NO t^ in M M N ■* ro >-< in Tf ON 01 00 NO CO ro 01 M 1^ N 01 Tj-NO ro in t^ ro ro 00 NO 0> ro NO ro 01 M ■+ ON O-NO oo N(j CO 01 On OnnO ro ro in 01 NO in ro 1- ro t^ M in •+ 01 M roNO NO M 01 i- t^ ro 01 M t~^ t^ *NO ro ro 01 t^ t^ ro ro i-t ro w 1^ Tl-vO t-l NO CO ro ^ in-HTj-o OON'^r^ m 01 On Tj- t^oo ■* -o 01 1-. O O >o ro 01 01 -^NO ON ro t^ os CNii-i^ro ro^i~»M 01 iH 01 01 m Tt- fv rONO 00 1^ 01 H ■+ ro rooo Tf 01 i-t ro ro ro t^ t~ 01 ■+ ih •^ w M m ro o 01 ro 01 M CO roco tx ro tv in M ■o ■* ON ■* t-. M S : 't ^ u c ^ D O O K t »3 c •^^•c i?fP '^P 2 t ^^^ u 1 ^"^ <:i C ^i-. i^ ,^ lu •♦«* t/; »^ 5i u c *** *. N-J 1> , '^ t— 1 7"* Nj ft ., 11 (J (L> = ?Cl i - •^Soo ft"?!? Jl P lU 1) 1) 2 ^ u V o o ^" "-rt 'I fmmj Canada. 397 in ercbt in connection with the question of the amount of crime which is attributable to drink. In the perusal of the return it should be borne in mind that the proportion of total abstainers to the whole population is ]:)robably considerably greater in Canada than in most countries ; also that the return deals only with indictable offences, not including those minor offences of disorderly conduct, etc., which are to a great extent directly the result of intoxication. Since the appointment of the Royal Commission on the Liquor Traffic, an attempt has been made to test the results of local prohibition under the Scott Act by statistical comparison between two considerable areas of land, throughout one of which the Act was in force, while the other was under a licence law. The province of New Brunswick was chosen for this purpose, from the fact that the Act was nowhere else in opera- tion over a continuous area large enough to enable such a comparison to be made. The i)articulars which follow were kindly furnished to me by Mr. Ceorge Johnson. If no great importance ought to be attached to them in a positive sense, they at least lend no support to the contention sometimes urged, that a remarkable increase of material prosperity is to be expected as the direct result of prohibition. The criminal record, however, is markedly favourable to the prohibitive area. In the province of New Brunswick there is a group of nine counties (Albert, Carleton, Charlotte, King's, Northumberland, Queen's, Sunbury, Westmoreland, York) which have been under the Scott Act for more than ten years. They are all connected geographically, and contain 6i per cent, of the whole population of the province. They contain several cities and towns of importa.xe, as Fredericton, Marysville, ^^'ood- stock, St. Stephen, Milltown, Chatham, Moncton. They are believed to be in every respect a group fairly representative of the whole country, in industries, religion, race, and general conditions. 398 American Liouor Laws. In the ten years 1882—91 there were 22,841 convictions in New I3runswick, viz. : — Mur^lers Rape and other offences against females Otlier offences attains! the person Kobljery, with violence, burglary, etc. ... Horse, cattle, and sheep stealing... Other offences against property ... Other felonies and misdemeanouis Ikeaches of municipal law and minor offences Drunkenness II 26 3>24i 67 2 45 4,993 13.598 22,841 In the whole Dominion there were 348,460 convictions. Taking the mean of population at 4,578,810, we have the average of 7,800 convictions per annum for every million inhabitants of Canada. In New Brunswick the average is 7,112 per million, about 9 per cent, less than the general average of the Dominion. Dividing the province according to Scott Act counties and non-Scott Act counties,* there were 8,738 convictions in the former (38"4 per cent.), and 14,102 in the latter (61 '6 per cent.) • /.(?., 61 per cent, of the population had 38 J per cent, of the criminal convictions, and 39 per cent, of the population had 61 V per cent, of the convictions. As respects population, the nine counties show a decrease of 4,869 ; the others show an increase of 4,899. 1881. 1891. Total population 321,233 321,263 Scott Act counties ... 201,291 196,422 Other counties 119,942 124,841 During the ten years the Scott Act counties retro- graded in respect of their population between 10 and 25 years of age by i"8 per cent, and increased with respect do popu- lation between 25 and 45 years by 4*3 per cent. ; while the * The non-Scott Act counties are Gloucester, Kent, Restigouche, St. John city, St. John county, Victoria. » * I I (U ^ C fij cr t« & C 3 O ^ X) •■^ a; t^ (U ■^-' s ON CO C/3 o -^ ^ ^* ^ ON *J 1-1 • l-H 73 rn C C • rH 03 .4_J .2 CO CO CO ro Ln b o P Ov w Ov vO vo vb VO vO o o V XI V 3 a 00 Ln b P 00 rn O in p IT) vb VO i-< o vO rn vp b VO n 00 oo 00 00 vo 00 CO rn O -^ rn m m ro c O ^ fO On o m o in On t^ CO N On in On o O O On M ^ "i- -^ rl- in u-> u^ N ^-t O ON "* m vo O in 00 OO CO vo 00 vo HH o h- ( h-i in M t ■^ "^ »o vn Ln tn 00 tx in O On in vO vo HH vo Tf- HH O OO tx 00 00 rt- rj t^ rf • m vO r^ N ro in M o^ tx ro NO VO OO Tf NO CO 00 rn r^ On ■^ Tf 1 u m On m in ON % >^ On tn r-^ NH s .•P f^ N Tf C^ W- W- m m- '^ ro m tn Q fO 00 vn N N ro o ON vo tx On NO On o m o ■* H • <> N •* On 00 NO t-» 00 ':»• o vn fl H4 t^ m oo rn cs Tt- ON NO (->. "^ On On On ON vo in t-. O N M W- t-H ro H4 w- : ^3 c ■» r 1 1/ after aw ]V c« -^ t: c ^ « c f Product cost of ] c 5 ^ ^ -^ c •- ! 0. t— , c ^ < u- "k 1 % ^ ^ c e X. t t ^ 17 : 2. ^ rr ^ r rt -.s L ) z L ) > >*' tJO a rt W t/) 1-1 > < s o 4oo A.UKKICAA fjQUon Lau's. ■■■ \ non-Scott Act counties increased between lo and 25 years by o"5 per cent., and between 25 and 45 years by 5*4 per cent. I'liere was, therefore, a larger movement outward from the Scott Act counties, than from the otliers, of persons at tlie working-age period of Hfe. Taking the Dominion through, the increase of population between the ages of to and 45 is 70 per cent, of the whole increase of the population between 1881 and 1 89 1. In the non-Scott Act counties. Uiilh rate 1S81 32-1 ,, 1S91 29-8 Death rale 18S1 16-4 ,, 1891 140 Tested by manufacturing development, the counties show an increase as follows* ; — I Nine Scott Act counties, increase per head ... $24*15 ^ Other counties ... ... ... ... ... 27*56 Nine Scott Act counties, increase per 1,000 ... i8'o Other counties ... ... ... ... .. 24*4 In ilie Scolt Act counties. r.irth rate 18S1 29-4 1891 26"I Death rate 1S81 14-1 •891 13-0 In cajjital .. In employees In wages In products L Nine Scott Act counties, increase per head of \ population ' Other counties I Nine Scott Act counties, increase per head I 0th er counties 5-28 8-27 11-84 22'8o .SUMMARV OF PROVINCIAL LIQUOR LAWS. Nfli'ii Scotia. — Statutes of 1886, c. 3. The Liquor Licence Act, 1886 (as amended by subsequent Acts). The Council of each incorporated city, town, or municipality is reciuired to nominate a chief inspector, and if necessary one or more additional inspectors, each of whom is to be a member in good standing of some recognised temperance organisation within the municipality or province. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council may confirm or veto the nomination, and the inspector holds office during good behaviour (he can only be removed by a majority vote at a special meeting of the Council, subject to the approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council), (.s. 4.) In the city of Hahfax * With respect to industrial development in all the provinces, see table on p. 399. Canada. 40 [ tlie appointment is annual. Throe kinds of licences are given : — liolel, sli()|), ;uul whok'sale. A hotel licence authorises sale only to /x'/id JiJi' ;j[iiests in the hotel for consumption at meals, or (on week da)s) in their rooms. A shop licence authorises sale in quantities not less than one i)int nor more than two <;allons, for ^.^/^-consumplion (s. s). A room in which liquor may be sold under a wholesale or shop licence must not have a door which docs not open on the public street (1890, c. 18, s. 12). Licence duties (s. 6) : — Hotel licence, $150. Shop licence, $100. Wholesale licence, $300. An application for a licence must be accompanied by a cerlidcate signed by two-thirds of the ratcjiayers of the polling district 'in Halifax city three-fifths for a hotel or shop, and a bare majority for a wholesale licence) (s. 10). Any resident in the polling district may object to the licence being granted, on the ground of the character of the appl ant, or of the premises, or of the requirements or quiet of the neighbourhood, or the proximity of a church, hospital, or school.* The inspector is also required to make a detailed report on each application. The Council may take notice of any matter which, in its opinion, would be an oljjection to the granting of a licence, although no notice of objection has been given; but in that case the applicant is entitled to have the matter adjourned for a few days. Licences are issued by the chief inspector, in pursuance of a resolution of the Council. The licensee has to find security for compliance with the law, himself in $500, and two sureties, $150 each. The licence is not annually renewed, but is forfeited on a second (or in some cases a third) conviction for the several offences mentioned in the Act (s. 81). In any municipality in which no licences are issued, the Council is allowed to appoint an agent to sell " such liquors as may be required for medicinal, manufacturing, and other jjurposcs, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act" (s. 59). Such agents, * Since 1890 no new licence can be given for premises within one hundred yards of a school or church. AA it| 402 Amf.riC/\n Liquor Laws, riiul diuj^gisls, can only sell on a ccrtiricate from a doctor or nia^istralc (1888, c. 4, s. 11).* When a person "by excessive (Irinkinj^ of li(|ii()r misspends, wastes, or lessens his or her estate, or ^Mvatly injures his or her health, or endanj^ers or interrupts the peace and hitppiness of his or her family," the sale to such person of any licpiors m;iy be prohibited (ss. 70, 71). If any person, when (h'unk, com nits suicide, or comes to his death by any accident caused by intoxication, or commits an assault, or injures nny i)roperty, any person who supplied him illej^^ally with litpior is liable to an action for damages (ss. 72 — 74). All sums received on account of licence duties and fines in each district go to form a licence fund for the district, out of which are paid the salaries of the inspector and the expenses of executinij the Act ; the residue being ajijilied to the general purposes of the municipality. One of the amending Acts contains a stringent prv)visi()n recjuiring the inspector to prosecute whenever a case is ntjtified to him by a ratepayer, antl sul)jecling him to a hea\y penalty (and on a second conviction to dismissal) in the e\ent of his refusal, if the ratepayer himself should successfully prosecute the offender on the evidence submi'ted to the inspector (1890, c. 18, s. 15). Any ratepayer who so notifies a case is to receive one-half of the fine (1891, c. 27, s 5). Statutes of New Brumiuick, 18S7, c. 4. The Liquor Licence Act, 1887. In New Ih'unswick only two kinds of licence are issued : tavern licences, and wholesale licences. The jjrovisions in the Nova Scotia law for putting a stop to the sale of liquor at bars are not adopted ; but a tavern must have, in a city or town, six bed- rooms, and elsewhere three bedrooms, for travellers, and must provide food. The licence duties are fixed by each municipality, but the duty for a tavern licence must be, in a city or incorporated town, not less than $50 nor more than $200, and elsewhere not less than $25 nor more than $200. The petition for a licence must be accompanied by a certificate signed by one-third of the ratepayers in the polling district ; and a * By a subsequent Act a penalty is enacted against any medical man who improvidently or without good and sufficient reason gives a certificate (1889, c. 17, s. 10). Canada, 403 licence cannot be given if the majority of the ratepayers ii: .. ^ity, incorporated town or parisli, petition against it. 'I'lie provisions respecting the hearing of objections to, and the granting of, licence^, and i\\v appointment of inspectors, etc., are generally simihir to the corresponding provisions in the law of Nova Scotia. There is, however, an express limiialion on the number of tavern licences to be issued, viz., as regards cities and incorporated towns : one for each 250 of the first r,ooo of the population in each ward, and for each 500 of the remainder ; and, as regards parishes not within a city or incorporated town, one for each 400 up to 1,200 of the pojnilation, and for each 1,000 of the remainder. Moreover, the Council of any municipality, by bye-law, may prohibit the issue of all tavern licences, or may further limit the number, and may lay down additional conditions and regulations respecting them. Licensed premises have to be closed from 7 jj.m. on Saturday to 6 a.m. on Monday. Quebec IJcoice La7o. Revised .Statutes, Title IV., c. 5, s. 12, 13 (,as amended Ijy subsequent Statutes). An applicant for an inn or restaurant licence must produce a certificate signed by twenty-five electors resident in the parish, township or village, or in the polling district of the town or city, in which the premises are situated. A licence cannot be granted if a majority of the electors in the polling district oppose it. The licence is granted by the Council of the municipality, except in the cities of Quebec and Montreal, where this power is exercised by the judicial authorities ; but a licence may be refused at the discretion of the licensing iDody. The provision relating to retail shop licences (for sale in quantities of not less than a pint) are generally similar, but the number of signatures required is only three. An " inn " must in the country districts contain at least three bedrooms for travellers, and stabling for four horses ; and, in a city or town, must contain two bedrooms, and means to supply meals ^for ten persons ; a restaurant must also be furnished to provide meals for ten persons. The penalties for sales to drunkards, and civil liabilities for the acts of drunken persons, are generally similar to those in force in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The court dealing with a licensee who has transgressed the A A 2 k/'A/M 404 hi/-:A/c.LV Liquor Laws. hiw has power in its discretion to revoke his licence, and, in certain cases, the revocation is compulsory. The Council of every county, cit)-, town, township, parisli. or incor[)()ratecl villaL;e, has power by bye-law to prohibit the sale of liijuor. The bye-law may. at the discietion of the Council -or. if the bye-law applies to a county, by demand of thirty electors for each municipality in the county- be submitted to thv whole body of munici])al electors for approval. And thirty electors of any municipality other than a county n'lay take the initiative in sub- mitting the question to a popular vote. A bye-law may be repealed in the same way as it was adopted. There is no general early-closing law on Saturdays, but early- closing may be adopted by municij)al bye-law. 'J'he Sunday- closing law does not extend to guests in hotels ; but the hotel bar must be closed on Sundays. The licence duties vary according to the value of the premises and their situation in a town or country district, ranging for uins and restaurants from .$800 down to 5)90, and for retail liquor shops from !ii4(X) down to $70. It is the duty of the collector of ])rovincial revenue to prosecute oftenders against tlie licence law when ret[uested to do so by a municipal corporation. In the case of infractions of a prohibitory bye-law, howe\"er, it is the duty of the niunici[)al Council itself to take proceedings. Fines im])osed at tlie suit of the collector are dixided between him, the informer, .".nd the provincial revenue. In the case of prosecutions by tlie collector for breach of a bye-law the municipality also takes a share. Ontario. The Li(|uor Licence Act of Ontario (revised Statutes, 18S7, c. 194), as amendijil by Acts of 1888. 1889, 1890 and '892, provides for the annual ap|)ointmcnt by the Lieutenant-Ciox'ernor of three Licence Connnissioners for each licence district, whose duty it is to regulate the number of licences for taverns and shops and the conditions under which they may be given, and to define the (hities of the inspector of the district (an otficer also appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor). A licence cannot ordinarih- be granted until the inspector has reported as to the fitness and good character of the api)licant. Provision is made for the liearing of objections, after which the commissioners in their discretion grant or refuse the licence ; but an application for a C.IAAD I. 405 new licence cannot be granted, unless it is supported by a majority of the electors in the polling district, one-third of whom must be resident therein. The application and objections thereto are required to be made at a public hearing ; the Hoard are entitled to considcn- any matter which they may think would be an objection to the granting of the licence, although no objection has been raised ; but in that case they must give notice to the applicant. They are competent to take sworn evidence. The ma\imi!m number of tavern licences in each distrif:t is limited ;is follows : — In cities, towns and incorporated \illages. one for each 250 of the first 1,000 of the jjopulation, and then one for each 400 ; "' but in no case shall this limit authorise any increase in any municipality in excess of the number of licences therein issued for the year ending the first day of Marcli, 1876, unless from the future increase of the population the Licence Commissioners think a larger numl)er has become necessary, but not in any case exceeding the limit imposed by this Act." In incorporated villages which are county town?, five taverns maybe licen "djalthougli the population would not warrant this number imder the general rule. The Council of every city, town, village, and township may, however, by bye-law, still further limit the number within its own area. Tavern licences may be for the sale of in'oxicating liquors generally, or may be for beer and light wines oniy, if the licence lioard by resolution declare that a portion of the allotted number of licences shay be so restrirted. Trcmises licensed as taverns must supply meals, and must also (subject to a limited power of allowing exceptions in cities and towns) contain sleeping accommodation for four (in cities, six) travellers, and in the country stabling for six horses. The Council of any city or town may also make additional requirements as to accommodation. The number of shop licences (tw., "off-licences" for the sale of liquor in cjuantities not less than three half-pints) may be limited by municipal bye-law, and the holder of such a licence may, in like manner, be required to confine the business of his shop solely to the selling of liquor, or be made subject to other restrictions. In any case, no new shop licences can bo granted for the sale of liquor in any premises where any other business is carried on, except the sale of mineral water, bottles, etc. ; and if any such business is carried on after the licence has 4o6 A:\ii:ric.\n Liovor Laws. been granted, it becomes ipso facto void, anil the licensee can be proceeded against for selling liquor without a licence. l-^ach licensee is required to give security for his compliance with the law by a bond in the sum of $200, with two sureties, $100 each. Wholesale licences are issued as of course on payment of the duty. The following are the licence duties : — H; Nature of Licence. Duty. Applic.ition of Duty. 'Javcrn or Shop Licence - $ $ In cities over 20.000 in- habitants 250 150 to provincinl revenue. Tn other cities 200 100 „ M In towns 150 70 ,, 1> In incorporat :il villages ... 120 60 „ » In townsliips 90 30 » >» Beer and Wine Licence — In cities 75 25 »> In towns 57 50 i7"5o )» In incorporated villages ... 45 15 ?» In townships 37-50 7-50 J> IVJwlesale IJccncc — 250 100 „ •» The remaind er of the duty goes in all case ■; to the licence iund of the licence district, and is applied fi rstiii defraying the expenses jf the licence board and inspector ; the resi- due is then apportioned, one- tldrd to the ] irovince, two- thirds to the niunici|)ality. Municipalities may by bye-law increase the duties on tavern and shop licences. Druggists are permitted to sell liquor for strictly medicinal purposes, but only on a medical certificate if the amount exceeds six ounces at any one time. Provisions are made against unlicensed clubs, and the Act provides elaborUely for reguUting the traffic, and checking ancj iv^ Caa'aoa. 407 *r punishing infringements of the hwv.* No liquor may be sokl between 7 o'clock on Saturday evening and 6 o'clock on Monday morning, and bar rooms must be kept closed during that time. The buyer, as well as the seller, of liquor during prohibited hours, and the buyer of liquor from an unlicensed seller, is liable to punishment ; so also is any person who sells to an unlicensed dealer, the latter buying for the purpose of re-selling, uiless such person resides or carries on business in another place, or proves that he acted innocently. A licence is in general revocable after a third conviction ; but separate proceedings must be taken for the purpose by the inspector, or the Licence Commissioners, or the county attorney, before the Judge of the County Court. Where a person, while intoxicated, comes to his death by misadventure or suicide, his personal representatives are entitled to recover damages up to $[,000 from anyone who supplied the liquor ; and a similar action lies where a person commits an assault or injures property while intoxicated. The magistrate may also forbid liquor to be sold to any person who, " by excessive drinking of liquor, misspends, wastes or lessens his estate, or greatly injures his health, or endangers or interrupts the peace and happiness of his family.'' And the relations of a drunkard may serve notice on liquor-sellers not to supply him with drink. In addition to the inspectors already mentioned, the Lieutenant- Governor may appoint provincial officers, and boartls of licence commissioners may appoint officers for their districts, to enforce the law. Any such officer, or any constalile or inspector, may enter taverns and liquor shops at all times ; and Wiirrants may be obtained for searching unlicensed i>remises. Manitoba. — Liquor Licence Act, 1S89 (as amended by subscc[uent Acts). The Manitoba law provides for the appointment of Licence Commissioners and an inspector for each licence district. An applicant for a restaurant licence (which is granted only in cities) must produce a certificate signed by sixteen substantial house- holders ihat the restaurant is a necessity for the purp )se of providing meals for the public ; and the inspector is required to * The Act comprises 153 sections, and 13 schedules. 4oS Ami'.ricax Fjquok Laws. see tliat meals arc provided for ihe public during the existence of the licence. Moreover, an application for any new licence, outside a town with 2,000 inhabitants, has to be backed by a recom- mendation signed by at least sixteen out of the twenty house- holders residing nearest to the premises ; and the licence can subsequently be cancelled on a petition by eight out of the twenty nearest householders. The licence duties range from $250 to $100 payable to the province, and the municipality may impose similar duties. Hotels are required to have in cities fifteen, in towns ten, and elsewhere six, bedrooms ; also a public sitting-room separate from the bar, and (in the country districts) stabling for twelve horses. The number of hotel and restaurant licences is limits_.t by the Act ; and a prohibitory bye-law may be passed for any munici- pality on a popular vote by a three-fifths majority. The Act contains stringent regulations, including a power to interdict sale to drunkards, and a "ci\il liability clause" for suicide or death by accident. «> V British Columbia. — The Licences Act. — Consolidated Acts, 188S, c. 72> ('"ind amending Acts). New retail licences arc not to be granted in any town,* village or settlement, except on a petition signed by two-thirds of the residents ; and municipalities have power to pass bye-laws regulating the issue of saloon and tavern licences. Subject to these restrictions, licences may be granted by justices of the peace sitt'^^g in open court at a special session. Renewals cannot be refused except on reasonable cause ; but a licence may be cancelled by a judge if he considers it unnecessary. The sale of liquor to drunkards may be prohibited. * This does not apply to the cities of Victoria, New Westminster, and Nanaimo. 409 1 1 APPENDIX I. Address deliver cd by Prof. Francis Way land {Dean of the Law Department 0/ Yale University) at the Sixth National Com'en- tion of Law and Order L^eagiies in the United States^ held at Philadelphia, L'ebruary 22, iSSS. I will, with your permission, address myself, in the brief time at my command, to these topics : the principles which should conti-ol temperance le^^islation and the policy by which alone such legislation can be made effective. I am very far from claimint^ any novelty for the views which I shall present. In fact, my fear is that I shall fatigue you with their triteness. I can only endeavour to emphasise and enforce some truths, which I think arc too often overlooked, but which are vital to the wisest settlement of a most difficult problem. It surely ought to be possible, especially in this city of Brotherly Love, to discuss the aspects of the general question which I have indicated without intemperance of language and without provoking intemperate oppositioi";. At all events the experiment seems to me worth trying. It should be observed on the very threshold of the discussion, that the whole subject of temperance legislation, so far at least as its penal side is concerned, presents certain marked anomalies. The first and most obvious of these is that an offence is created and defined unknown to the common law. And while this anomaly is by no means confined to temperance and penal legislation, it has this peculiarity or distinctive feature, that other statutory offences, almost if not quite without exception, have been adopted by general if not uniform consent, from obvious if not admitted considerations of public policy — such as burglary in the daytime, having in posses- sion burglar's implements, carrying concealed weapons, selling lottery tickets, etc. etc. Again, in every proposed form of temperance legislation whether by regulation or prohibition, we are dealing with an article of commerce — an article, the manufacture and sale of wl^ich must, for certain purposes, be permitted, i.e., legalised. Once more so far as such legislation is penal we are making it an offence to sell where it is no offence to buy ; in other words, two intelligent, responsible moral agents voluntarily combine to do an 4 lo ^1m/-:k/('A\ Liquor Laws. act which is in violation of law, and only one of the parties to the transaction is liable to punishment. Again, in every community in our land those who invoke the aid of legislation to regulate or suppress the traffic in intoxicating liquors as a beverage are widely, and I fear almost hopelessly, divided as to the best methods to be pursued to diminish intemper- ance, the advocates of various expedients embracing some of the best citizens to be found in any community. While, antagonising all efforts at regulation or prohibition, we find a body of resolute men with almost unlimited resources, compact, united, aggressive, untiring, and bound together by the powerful motive of self-interest. Now, in view of these anomalies and others which might be mentioned, it follows inevitably, docs it not ? that if the friends of the various measures which have been proposed persist in adhering to their respective methods — maintaining their positions with active, not to say intolerant zeal, no one measure can ever command such a preponderance of public sentiment as is absolutely indispensable to the efficient execution or enforcement of any law. If one wing of the general army succeeds in securing legislative sanction for its favourite method by a small, or under severe pressure in a time of feverish excitement by a considerable, majority, the divergent opinions to which I have alluded will sooner or later make them- selves felt in the press, in the police force, on the bench, in the jury box ; and the enactment, lacking the hearty moral support of the great body of the people, will fail to accomplish the purposes which its promoters aimed to secure. That a given measure can be enacted under the immediate impulse of vehement excitement is no test of its wisdom, utility, or practical working power. It must stand the further test of the calm, deliberate, matter-of-fact judgment of the community in its normal condition, and that judgment, according to the degree of its concurrence or condemnation, will decide the question. Whatever measure has at its back a powerful preponderance of public opinion will have the surest prospect of success, and the converse of this proposition is equally tiue. If, for example, in any State or county or town, prohibition can command wellnigh uniform moral support, then and there prohibition may hope for success, so long as this attitude of the public mind and heart remains unchanged. But where this is not the case, there would seem to be a demand for mutual concession on the part of the promoters of temperance reform Appendix I. 411 The starvinj^ man, if sane, docs not say, "I will eat no bread if I cannot have a whole loaf." The wise reformer does not say " I will not lift my finger in favour of any policy which falls short of my full demands." He rather says, does he not.^ " I will join a present, practicable, onward movement in the assured hope that it is only preparing the way for a further advance. If nothing is done or attempted while I am waiting for the coming of the ideal measure, I cannot hold myself blameless for the pernicious results which are sure to follow. Pending the coming in of the better and brighter day which is the final goal of all my efforts, I am still my brother's keeper, and cannot hope to escape my share of the grave responsi- bility." Suppose the Northern opponents of slavery — and by this I do not mean the abolition party— had said for a generation or two, before the war, slavery is a great moral wrong, the crime of the century, we will never vote to restrict it within existing limits, for that would involve us in complicity with the crime. We will not give aid by voice or vote to any policy which does not look ex- clusively to its instant abolition. Would this have been wise.? Would it have been statesmanlike in view of the divergence of public opinion at the North ? But by-and-by came a crisis which cemented the free States almost to a man in a common bond of union, and from that moment slavery was doomed. It could live and thrive with a divided North ; it died before a united North. Take another illustration bearing directly upon the topic under discussion. If, in any community, the decided preponderance of public sentiment, indicated partly by the prevailing opinion of the press, partly by the drift of the popular uttcnince and action, and partly by the emphatic repudiation at the polls of more stringent measures, is substantially in favour of prohibiting sales of intoxica- ting liquors to minors, to drunkards, on the Sabbath, on election days, after certain hours in secular days, and is also in favour of materially diminishing the number of saloons, then clearly temper- ance legislation in that community should be content, for the time, with seeking these ends by suitable and adequate enactments, enforced with wholesome, deterrent penalties. And it is equally true, is it not, that if in another community, overwhelming public sentiment unmistakably ascertained, should unequivocally favour absolute prohibition, then temperance legisla- tion obeying and reflecting the popular will of that community should hopefully enact such provisions as might best secure the end aimed at by a prohibition policy. But, in cither case— and this 412 Ameik/cix Liquor L.nrs, briiv^s me to my second point, the policy by wliich alone temperance Ic^Mslation can be made effective — in cither case, the work is but begun when the Governor's signature has been secured. Just here is, if I mistake not, a serious error in the attitude of some temperance reformers, conspicuously so — may I be pardoned for saying — among the advocates of prohibition. Overlooking the anomalous character of the subject with which they are dealing, they attach vastly too much importance to the mere enactment of the law. They worship the legislation which has rewarded their untiring efforts as a sort of fetish, able to work miracles by the simple circumstance of its existence on the statute book. They burn incense before its silent pages, and fancy that a temperance millcnium has arrived because their idolised enactment has passed the Legislature and received the executive endorsement. If, by-and- by, they discover that the effects for good are not commensurate with their highly-wrought expectations, they seek to make the law more coercive and repressive, arguing, with, as it seems to me, singularly lame logic, that the stricter the law, the more implicit the obedience. Meanwhile, with a blindness born, I must believe, of a too narrow devotion to an abstract principle, they wholly neglect that vigilant, ceaseless personal effort and co-operation, without which such a law, or, indeed, any law on this subject, whether of regu- lation or prohibition, can never be made effecti\c. The moment they have secured the desired legislation, they relax the energy which they employed to ol)tain the aid of the law mak'^-s and the chief magistrate. They leave everything to the machinery of the courts and the action of the officers of the law, whose ser\ ices in such cases are too often perfunctory. They are willing to in- fluence votes at home, to haunt legislative halls and button-hole bucolic legislators, but they shrink from following uj) their action by applying to tlie detection of offences against the law the same pervasive and well-intended activity which has crowned their earlier efforts with success. When the reaction comes, and it docs come sometimes, docs it not ? and the law proves to be practically a dead letter, they content themselves with denouncing the disagreeing or acquitting juries, the lukewarm judges, the inefficient sheriffs and consta- bles, the timid or perjured witnesses, and the generally indifferent citizens. But all this complaint does not mend the matter. The only I 1 Appendix I. 413 l^olicy wliich will secure the adequate enforcement of any form of temperance legislation is the policy which invites and obtains the active, cordial co-operation of iaw-aljidin^- citizens. The or- dinary machinery of the courts will not, unaided, accomplish the desired result. The rules and practices which prevail in the case of crime against pers(jn and proj^erty are not a|;|)licable Jiere. A personal \i,^ilance which never sleeps, a personal activity which never tires, a treasury which is never empty, and all these outside the paid officers of the law — such a policy as this is needed to make temperance lej^islation effective. Such voUuUary organisa- tion and effort must be well disciplined and kept in countenance by the presence and public sympathy of the best citizens. Official action must be supplemented always, and often stimulated by unofficial energy. Wholesome public sentiment nuist be crystal- ised, vitalised, utilised. The horde of wrongdoers combined to override the law and avoid punishment must be met and overborne by a larger body of resolute defenders of the law, commanding and deserving the sympathy, the respect and the approval of all lovers of law and order. Witnesses must be obtained, fairly paid and properly protected from al^use and persecution. Indifterent or hostile prosecuting officers must not be allowed to dodge their duty. 15ail must ha made to mean actual pecuniary responsibility, and bail bonds forfeited must not be suftered to slumber in the official desk. Moreover, constant vigilance will be needed to see to it that the law is not weakened or impaired by mischie\'ous amendments ingeniously urged by pretended friends of the Bill. Competent legal skill must be employed to guard the provisions of the law from being tampered with ; in a word, the fact must be ever recognised that a sleepless enemy is in the field, and that he is to be prevented froni doing serious injury to the cause only by opposing to him an ability and a watchfulness superior to his own. He must feel that he is to encounter not alone the agents of the law performing in a more or less perfunctory manner their official duty, but all this, plus an active, energetic, co-operating public sentiment, in visible form and with persistent purpose. In the preparation of cases against the liquor-seller for violation of the statute, whether prohibiting or regulating sales, the prose- cuting officer should find his hands strengthened by the efficient sympathy of reputable citizens. During the trial of the case, he should see among the spectators not alone, as is too often true. 414 American Liquor Laws. \ a whisky-lovin;;, nay, whisky-laden crowd, but a fair representa- tion of order-loving and la'.\-.d>idin;4 men and women, watchinj:; the i)roL,M-css of the trial and encouraging the oftkials, both on the bench and at the bar, in the fearless discharge of their duty. And the same vigilant oversight should continue until the verdict anil tlie announcement and execution of sentence. Do you say that this active alliance between the i)rivate citizen and the public official ought not to be necessary? Granted. Nor ought it to be necessary to keep uj) the expensive machinery of courts of justice for the trial of offenders against law. Do you remind me that like interference of the citizen is not called for in the case of other offences .'' Granted. But consider that in the case of every other criminal otTence known to the common or the statute law there is, as has been already indicated, a general, if not unanimous, conviction in the minds of the vast majority of voters that such criminal offence is rightly punished in the interests of good order and good morals. The convicted offender hnds no sympathy in the community ; no one seeks to screen him from the consequence of his wrong-doing. In the arrest, the trial, the verdict of guilty, the punishment after sentence, the machinery of the law moves without friction. Enlightened public sentiment, in defiance of which no law can be long, if ever, enforced, sustains the appointed authorities of the State from the beginning to the end of their action, and praises them in propor- tion to their zeal, diligence, and success. Nay, more. Witnesses do not hesitate to come forward to testify to what they know. Juries unhesitatingly find verdicts in accordance with the proved facts. Courts give sentences based on the decision of the jury. Is all this true in the case of attempts to enforce stringent liipior laws ? Is it not notoriously difficult to produce evidence of their violation ? nay, often impossible 'i Can juries be relied on to convict even on clear evidence ? Are magistrates or judges always independent .'' If in default of such testimony as reputable citizens cognisant of material facts decline to furnish, you seek to prove your case by means of paid informers, whose reputation for truth and \cracity is not and cannot be impeached ; is their evidence fairly weig'ned and impartially considered by court or jury ? You all know what the truthful answers to these questions must be. If, then, the disease is exceptional in its character and symptoms, the treatment must also be exceptional. Let organised effort among good citizens be directed to the 'U \\ Appendix I. 415 • enforcement of existing laws, and for two reasons: i. Uecause a law on ihe statufj book, violated with absolute or comparative impunity, ,s a serious menace to ^^ood order, cncouraoin- olicnders and enlar^dn- the area of their wron^-doin-. It breeds a spirit which, by-and-by, ripenin- into the creed'^.f the an- aichisls, yields alle-iaiue and obedience t.. no lau', and demands unrestrained immunity from all law. 2. Because we can only judn-e of the value of any law by its strict enforcement A law not enforced has no attributes, no features, no value, is of no more weight or worth on the statute book than is the letter n in pneumonia. Knforce it, by the aid, if necessary, of the whole moral power of the community, and you will speedily ascertain its value It may prove to be all you need for the present, at least. At all events, it .s reasonable to presume that it means soinethino- and that, if enforced, it may accomplish some -ood result. You' Jiave no right to tamper with it, or ignore it, or denounce it until It has been put to tlie test of a fair experiment. It must be a very poor enactment which does not possess enough power to be ,.f considerable use, if it can be carried out. And, however that may be the time to amend or to repeal an existing law is when, alter adequate experiment, before competent courts, it has been proved to be too weak to be effective, or too stringent to secure the sympathy or co-operation of the community. To tamper with a law smiply because there is a theory that it can be improved IS mischievous nonsense. Enforce existing laws when you can, amend or repeal them when you nn.st. Never trille with them or ignore them, or expect them to enforce themselves. If one-half vou sav about the cnils of intemperance be true, the good citizen has a duty to perform. Nvhich IS by no means confined to reading temperance tracts, or listening to temperance addresses, or even aiding to secure tem- perance legislation of his favourite variety. And it seems to me hat no lover of good order and good morals has a right to with- lold his active co-operation from the methods and measures of tins organisation. 4i6 Arri-NDix If. TIk.' lollcnviiig is the full lot of the li(|Uor ordinance of Atlanta :— LKjUOR lUArFIt". I. Wholesale Houses, 886 893. Suction. Skction. 8S0. Wiitlcn applications. S87. Deposit rc'iuired. 888. rciially for retailing; l»y cva sion. 88<^. Not sell without licence 8ijo. Licence revocable 891 . Keepinj.^ on liaiul for unlawful sale. 892. Close when saloons close. 893. Iloursof o|)ening and closing. Sfx'tion. 894 Ketail li(|U(ir limit.-;. 895 No separate l)ecr licences in these limits. 896. Price of licences. 897. Character of licensees. 898. No screens or blinds. 899. Place level with streets. 900. No gaming allowed. 901. Loitering prohibited. 902. Open and close, when. 903. Close on days named. 904. Oath of ap])licant. 905. Not sell without licence. 906. Sign to be posted. 907. Must admit officers. 90S. Penalty. Retail Houses, c';4 922. Seciion. 910. Application, how made. 911. Mayor and Council may re- voke. 912 9'3 Ktgidations as to transfers. licence shall not To whom issue. 914. Not keep on hand for un- lawful sale. 915. Emjjty kegs on sidewalks. 916. Retail at Pierlmont Park 917. Forfeitures of beer licences. 918. Forfeitures if place a nuisance. 919. Must keep minors out. 920. Punishment of minors. 92 r. Sign as to minors. 922. Alcohol — Druggists tected. 909. Conviction revokes licence. Section 886. All persons, tirms, corporations or companies desiring to engage in the sale of spirituous or malt liquors at wholesale, in said city, shall make written application to the Mayor and Creneral Council for such privilege, and the said Mayor and General Council may, in its discretion, grant or refuse such privilege, upon each application made : Provided^ that no such privilege shall be granted to carry on such business at any place in said city, outside of the limits prescribed for the retail of ardent spirits. ~:ia5 ~- - ■'_ -_ llTI.NDIX //. 4'7 Sec. 887. IJcforc any licence shall issue as above set forth, the ap)3licant shall pay to the Cit>- Clerk the smn of twenty-five dollars, and the Clerk's fee of lifly cents, and shall make and subscribe before said Clerk, on oath, that he wiM not, by himself, or others, sell any spirituous or malt liquors in any (|uatuity less than one gallon, nor permit any so sold to be divided or drank on the premises where sold ; nor sell, nor permit the same to be sold, in any quantity to a minor, or a person already intoxi'^ated ; and shall also give bond with security, to be approved of by the Clerk, in the sum of two thousand dollars, conditioned faithfully to observe all State laws and city ordinances pertaining to the said business. Si:c. 888. Any person licensed as aforesaid who shall sell any spirituous or malt liquors other than at wholesale, or who shall by any devise by himself, or his agents, subdivide the same or j^ermit ihc same or any part thereof, to be drank on the premises, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by a tine not exceeding live hundred dollars, or imprisoned not exceeding thirty days, or both, in the discretion of the court, and such conviction shall work an immediate revocation of his licence. Sec. 889. Any person, firm, corporation, or company, who shall sell or offer for sale at wholesale, any spirituous or malt liquors, without having first complied with all the provisions of this ordinance, shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a line not exceeding five hundred dollars, or imprisoned not exceeding thirty days, or both, in the discretion of the court. Sec. 890. All licences under this ordinance shall issue for one year, but may be revoked by the Mayor and (General Council at any time upon refunding the applicant \\\^ pro-rata amount for the unused time, and no licence is transferable except by consent of Mayor and General Council. Such licence shall protect but one place, and that the place specified in the licence. Sec. 891. Any person, firm, or corporation who shall keep for unlawful sale in any store, house, room, office, cellar, stand, booth, stall, or other place, or shall have contained for unlawful sale in any barrel, keg, can, demijohn, or other package, any spirituous, fermented, or malt liquors for such sale, shall, on conviction, be punished by fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprison- ment not exceeding thirty days, either or both, in the discretion of the court. Sec. 892. Wholesale liquor houses shall be required to close r. B 4i8 .■iMKRiciy Liquor Laws. their doors on Christmas Day of every year ; and at all otlicr times when retail liquor dealers are required to close their places, except that on holidays, other than Sundays and Christmas Days, wholesale dealers may ship j^oods to the trade outside of the city, Sp:c. 893. The hours for opening and closing wholesale liquor houses shall be the same as for saloons, to wit : ()|)en not earlier than 5 o'clock a.m. and close not later than 10 o'clock p.m. Sec. 894. The Mayor and General Council may, in their discretion, grant or refuse licence to sell, at retail, spirituous or malt liquors, on the business portion of the following streets, between the points named on each application made, to wit : [The limits wiihin which licences may be granted are here set out.] Sec. 895. Within the limits above provided, on the streets above named, no se))arate licence for the sale of lager beer or malt liquors shall be issued. Outside of the above limits on business portions of business streets within practicable and efficient police supervision, and in localities where there is no reasonable objec- tion thereto, licences may be issued for the retail of lager beer and malt liquors only. Should any dealer licensed to sell lager beer and malt liquors only, by himself or agent, have, or keep on hand, or sell, furnish, or ofter to sell, or furnish to any persons any spirituous liquors, his licence shall thereupon and thereby be forfeited, and such person so offending shall, on conviction thereof, be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars and imprisoned thirty days. The sentence, on conviction, shall include imprisonment, and shall not be less than thirty days, and in any such case neither the Mayor, or the Mayor and General Council shall have any power or authority to reduce or relieve the sentence by revision, pardon, or otherwise ; and such person shall not thereafter be entrusted with any I'cence to sell either spirits or malt liquors. Any agent of any such licensed dealer m malt liquors who shall violate the foregoing provisions shall be subject to the penalties and disqualifications herein above provided. All licences for the retail of lager beer and malt liquors shall issue subject to the right and purpose of the city by its police officers and policemen, and special agents and inspectors at any and all times to inspect the conduct of the business of any such licensed dealer and agents, as also the character of the stock kept by any such dealer. Sec. 896. The price of each licence to retail spirituous or L '1 ArPEXDix II. 419 r spirituous and malt licjuors shall be at the rate of one thousand dollars per annum, and the Clerk's fee of fifty cents, which in each case may be paid quarterly \\\ advance. The price of each licence to retail lager beer and malt liquors only shall be at the rate of one hundred dollars per annum, anrl Clerk's fee of fifty cents, payable quarterly in advance.* Sec. 897. No licence to retail, as aforesaid, shall issue to any jierson other than of good character, sobriety, and discretion, and regard to this shall be had on, and as to, each ap[)lication made. .Sec. 89S. Xo place, for which a licence to retail as aforesaid shall issue, shall have any screen, blinds, or jjainted glass, or other obstruction of the view through the doors and windows thereof. Licence shall not issue for any place which does not front on, or have the main entrance thereto directly from, a public street, but this requirement shall not apply to hotels where the bar is so situated as to be open to the view generally of persons stopping at said hotels. Sec. Sv9. Xo licence shall issue for any place not substantially on a level with a public street, except that the Mayor and General Council may, in their discretion, grant or refuse licence to retail in basements sufficiently open to view. Shc. 900. Xo gaming table, gaming device or api)aratus, shall be kept or used at any place for which licence is granted, nor shall any game by cards, ten-pins, or music, or otherwise, be played at any such place for amusement, exercise, or for anything of value, nor shall any pools be sold, ])rovided the keeping of billiard and pool tables and playing thereon for exercise or amusement only, shall not be prohibited in hotels when the same are in a different room from the bar. Sec. 901. No person to whom a licence is issued shall permit drunken or disorderly persons to assemble or xoiter therein. Sec. 902. No place for which a licence is granted shall be kept open later than 10 o'clock p.m., or opened earlier than 5 o'clock a.m. Sec. 903. Xo person licensed to sell spirituous or malt liquors in said city, shall keep open his place or sell or furnish liquors on the Sabbath, Fourth of July, or Christmas Day, or on occasions when, in the judgment of the Mayor and Police Commissioners, $250 per annum by Tax Ordirance of 1891. 11 1! 2 420 Ameiuc.w Ijquou Laws. ihe ( onservin;^ of the jjcace and oicIlt of the ( il\ re(|uireb < losinj^s and lhc\ first notify such dealer to ch).se. Sec;. 904. Ail jjcrsons to whom licences shall issue shall take the oaths re(|uire(l b> law, and any person heieafler a|)|)lyinj^ for the j^rantin;^ of i{;tail liijuor or beer li( ence, or the removal or transfer of su(h li(:en( e, shall be re(|uii(;d, in ( oinieclion with such application, to lake, subscribe, and file an aflidavit statin;^ that the api)licant has not ijcen ( onvicled of violating; the Slate laws re^ulalin;^ the liipun- tralli( , or the city ordinances whicli |)rovides for grantin;^ of retail li(iuor and beer licences and ])rescribes for the conduct of licensed saloons, and further statinj^ that no indif t mcnt or accusation is pending against him in the Slate Court, or any Recorder's Court, charging su(di violation. Thai any jjcrson falsely swearing to the allidas it re(|uired by the ])rece{ling section, shall be jirosecuted by the Chief of Folice in the Superior Ccnirt of l''ullon ( ounty. Sec< 905. No person shall, in said < ily, lelall or sell in quantities less than one quart, any sj>"rituous or mall li(|uors without having obtained licence therefor, paid the requiied price, given the bond and taken the oath provided by law and ordinance. Six. 900. Licensed retailers (hotels excepted shall, within five days after obtaining licence, affix a sign board near to, oi" o\er his door, on which shall be printed in plain \\()rdh, '• Licensed retailer of si)irituous li(|uors." .Skc. 907, It shall be the duty of each and every licensed retailer of spirituous li(|uors to admit the i\Liyor or any member of the (jcneral Coiuu il. I'olice Commissioner, or any police officer or policem m, into his or her premises at any time when such |)ermission may be demanded. Six. 908. Any person violating any of the foregoing provisions (>f this ordinance shall, for each offence on conviction thereof, be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars, or imprisonment thirty days, either or both, in the discretion of the ( ourt. Sic. 909. The conviction in a .State court of any person licensed to retail spirituous or malt li(|iiors for the violation of the State Statutes in relation to the sales of aident spirits to a minor or person already intoxicated ; or the conviction of a retailer before the Recorder's Court for the violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance, shall work an immediate revocation of the licence of such person, and for any further exercise of the privilege granted by yl/'/'/:.\/)/.v //. .\2l surh licence, lie •^li.ill be punished as one retailing witlioul licence.* .Sk( . ';io. Mach person applying for licence to retail as aforesaid shall, at the time of application, deposit with the ( lerk a written description of the place where he desires to ( arry on the business, and a certificate of two, one of whom must br- an adjoining neighbour, or more of his sober, respectable, near neighbours, not interested in the application, recommending the applicant as lit to be trusted with such li( (;nce ; and shall also present the written consent of the owner or agent of the |)remises in which lie desires to carry on the business. The applicant shall also tender a bond, with good security in th(.' sum of one thousand dollars for the keeping of a decent and orderly lunise, and for compliance with all laws of the State of Georgia and said city relating to the li(|iior Iraflicand the regulation thereof. In case of any and each brea(,h of the condition of said bond the amount thereof shall be li(|uidaled damages and ref:ovcr- able in action in favour of said city for the same. In case the Mayor and Ocncral Council shall direct suit, and Ijy resolution, or vote, declare- a breach of any bond to li;ive occurred, said body may also declare the licence (jf the party forfeited and revoked, l-.ach bond tendered shall liiveat least two names as securities thereon, and no person shall be security on more than one bond at the same time. The securities sh.all also justify as to their solvency to the amount of bond over and above debts and liabilities, and homestead and exemption laws. When the application is made and bond tendered, as above provided, the same sh.dl be referred to the committee and ])olicc, who shall personally examine the location and surroundings of the place for which licence is applied, notify, or have notified, adjacent tenants or owners, or agents of owners and also the owner, tenant, or agent of the owner of the place, or buiMing, ff)r which licence is applied, as may be j^racticable, of the pending of su' h .-'pplication and report thereon, at the next regular meeting of Mayor and (General (J(nmcil or as early thereafter as practi( able. Ski . ')\ I. The price (-f licences to retail, the time they may last, and the amount of l;<»nd, may be lixcd or rhangf.-d at any timet l)rovi(led no vested rights arc impaired by ^uch change ; otherwise all such licences shall expire on June 30th, following the date of same, but may be revijkcd at any time by tlie Mayor and General "^ This .Sccli'iu uph'.M in case Spiaybcrry v. Atlanta by .Supreme Court, ^mm-zj 422 Amek/cax LiQUOK Laws. Council for the violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance, any other ordinances of the city, or laws of the State, relating to the retail liquor traffic and regulation of the same. Sec. 912, No licence is transferable, except by consent of the Mayor and General Council, as regard shall be had to the person to be entrusted with such licence. No licence shall protect more than one place, and that the place described therein, and no liquors shall be retailable in the streets of said city. Sec. 913. No licence to retail shall issue to any person who shall hereafter sell liquors by the gallon in said city under whole- sale licence, where the purpose of such person shall be to supply other than licensed dealers with liquors, and where the amount and extent of the stock kept by such persons arc less than requisite for the carrying on, in good faith, the wholesale trade. Nor shall retail licence issue to any person who shall hereafter, in said city, sell liquors by the gallon with the knowledge that persons acting together in purchasing the same will immediately divide, or have the dealer selling the same divide it for immediate consumption or carrying away. Sec. 914. Any jjerson who shall keep on hand for unlawful sale by the quart (not having licence from the Commissioner of Roads and Revenues of Fulton county) any liquors kept ostensibly for sale at wholesale by the gallon, or shall permit the division of the same by purchasers, or others in his presence, or shall retail the same, shall be debarred of a wholesale or retail licence hereafter, and in addition, shall, on conviction of either offence named in this and the preceding section, be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars, or imprisoned thirty days, either or both, in the discretion of the court. Sec. 915. It shall be unlawful for empty beer kegs to remain on the sidewalks or streets of Atlanta longer than twenty-four hours after being placed there ; that all Breweries or their agents, doing business in said city, be required to make daily collections of empty kegs, and any Brewery or agent violating the provisions of this ordinance shall, upon conviction before the Recorder, be fined not less than five dollars and costs for each offence. Sec. 916. On compliance with all laws and ordinances of the city with reference to obtaining licence to retail liquor, and the deposit of ten dollars per day, and Clerk's fee for the time applied for, accompanied by the written consent of the authorities of the Gentlemen's Driving Club, or the Piedmont Exposition Company, the Clerk of Council is authorised to issue licence to retail malt Ari'E.YDlX If. 423 and spirituous liquors on the grounds of the Piedmont Exposition Company, or (Gentlemen's Driving Club ; provided, that the hours of closing shall be ten o'clock p.m., and of opening seven o'clock a.m., and the person or persons receiving such licence shall be subject to all laws and ordinances regulating the retail liquor traffic. Such licence shall be subject to forfeiture at any time on the request of either the Piedmont Exposition Company, or Gentlemen's Driving Club, or authorities thereof, and licences arc also taken subject to this provision for forfeiture. Sec. 917. All the provisions of the ordinance aforesaid, of the retail liquor ordinance, relating to application, bond, licence, regulation, selling without licence, penalties, forfeiture of licence, etc. etc., in case of retail of spirituous, or malt and spirituous liquors, shall apply to the retail of lager beer and malt liquors, except as otherwise herein provided. Sec. 918. The Mayor and General Council shall f.irfeit the licence of any retailer of either spirituous or lager beer, or ruilt liquors, whose place becomes a nuisance or of ill-repute, by disorder thereat, or otherwise. Sec. 919. It shall be unlawful for any minor to go into any place where spirituous or malt liquors are kept for retail, unless by written consent of parent or guardian, and any minor violating the provisions of this ordinance shall, on conviction before the Recorder, pay a fine of not less than five dollars, or work on the public works not less than five days. Sec. 920. Any person under twenty-one years of age who shall, under false representation as to age, buy or allow to be bought for him, other than by parent or guardian, any liquors, malt or spirituous, in any retail saloon of this city, shall, upon conviction before the Recorder, pay a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars, or serve not less than twenty-five days on the public works. Sec. 921. All places licensed to retail spirituous or malt liquors shall have posted in conspicuous places about their place of busi- ness, " No minors allowed in here," and the same shall be con- sidered sufficient notice. Sec. 922. When any person applies to any druggist or other lawful dealer for the purchase of alcohol, and shall state that it is bought for mechanical, medicinal, or chemical purposes, the state- ment or assurance of said purchaser as to the use intended, shall be a complete protection for such druggist or other lawful dealer in alcohol, from any prosecution under any city ordinance. 424 .Imekic.in Lit^woR L.iirs. Petition and Bond to Sell at Wholesale Spirituous and Malt Liquors. IPETITIOlSr. To THE MaYOK ANU (jK.MCK A1. COUNCIL OF THK CiTY OF AtI.ANTA. r.KNTi.KMKN,— Desii-iny to engage in the business of Selling at Wholesale Spirituou- and Malt Litjiiois at No. Street, in said City, 1 present thi>. my application, with Bond, in accordance with the ordinances of the City governing the same. Respectfully, „_ BOND-NOT LESS THAN TWO SECURITIES. Georgia, Fulton Cotinty, > City of Atlanta. S Atlanta^ Ga. _ 18 Know all Men by these Presents, 'I'hat _^ . Principal, and Securities, all jf s.iid County, are each held and firmly bound unto the City of Atlanta in the penal sum of 'rwo Thousand Dollars, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, and administrators, jointly and severally, by these presents, signed, sealed, and dated, this 18 . And each ol us hereby waive and renounce for ourselves and families, respectively, the benefit of all homestead and exemption laws of the said State, or of the Ijiited Stales, as against the amount of this bond and the payment of the same, or liability thereon. The Condition of this Obligation is such, That whereas the said Principal, has filed his application lor Licence to sell at Wholesale Spirituous and -Malt Liquors, at No. _ . . . __ Street, said City, to terminate on the day of 18 . Now it the said shall comply with all lawsof the said State of Georgia, and satd City, relating to the liquor traflic and the regulation thereof, during the period named in this Bond, then this obligation to be void ; else of force. In case of breach, the amount of the Bond to be liquidated damages in favour of said City. fL.S.j Attest [L.S.I JUSTIFYING OATH OF SURETIES. State 0/ Georgia, \ ■> Fulton Comity ) Personally appeared before the undersigned . _ _ Sureties on the abo\e Bond, who being duly sworn, depose and say that they are worth the amount of said Bond over and above all debts and liabilities, and over and above the amount of homestead or exemption allowed by the laws of said State. Sworn to and subscribed before me this ) , \t • State 0/ Georgia, \ Pulton County } Personally appeared before the undersigned applicant above, who being duly sworn, deposes and says that he wid not, by himself or others. Sell any Spirituous or JLalt Liquors in any quantity less than one gallon, nor permit any so sold to be divided or drank on the premises where sold, nor will I sell, or permit the same to be sold in any quantity, to a minor or a person already intoxic.'ited. Sworn to and subscribed liefore me this > 18 -J LThe form of petition, when granted, is endorsed with the words " Approved, with the right reserved by the City to revoke .and withdraw the Licence, upon failure to comply with, or a violation of .any of the C)rdinaiices of tiie City or laws of the State, enacted for the goxeinment of the same," to which the necessary signatures are appended.] tpj'E.XDIX 11. Petition and Bond to Sell at Retail Spirituous and Malt Liquors. \ IPETITI OltT. To PHE Mayor and LIknkkai, Colncil or thk City ok Atlanta. Gkntlk.mrn," Desiring to engage in the Ijusiness of selling at retail Spirituous antl Nlalt I.icjuorsat Xo. Street, in said city, I present this, my application with accompanying consent of owner or agent of said place, and of two of my near neighhours, one of whcm is adjoining neighbour, and Bond, in accordance with the Ordinance uf the city governing same. Kespectfully, _. . CoNsi;Nr OK Landlord or Aoent. 'i'he undersigned, being the owner or agent of the place described in the above petition, hereby consents to the use of the same by the above petitioner, for the purpose m said petition stated. Respectfully, Cektiku.a IE OK Aimaci;nt Neiohhokks — Not Less Than 'iwo. The undersigned, near neighbours to petitioner's place above described, and one of ihem an adjoining neighbour, recommend the above petitioner as fit to be entrusted with the licence prayed for. BoM)— Not Less than Two Sell kitiics. Geors;ia, Fulton County, > .,,, ^ City of Atlanta. ) Atlanta, C,a. _ K.xow ALL Men by these Presents, that 169 — , Principa 'tiK-l , Securities, all of said county, are each held and firmly bound u'nlo the City of Atlanta in the penal sum of One Thoisano Dollars, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, by these presents. Signed, sealed, and dated this , 1 3.; . And each of us hereby waive and renounce for ourselves ami families respectively, the benefit of all homestead and exemption laws of said State, or of the United States, as against the amount of this Kond and the payment of the same, or liability thereon. The CoN'unioN ok this Odlicja tion is such, that whereas the said _, Principal, has filed his application for Licence to sell at retail Spirituous and Mall Li(|uorsat No. Street, said city, to terminate on the day of ,109 with the privilege of payments (piarterly, or otherwise as prescribed by Ordinance. Now,' if the said _ shall keep an orderly and decent house, and comply with all laws of the State of (Jeorgia, and said city, relating to the liquor traffic and the regulation thereof, during the period named in this Bond, then this obligation to be void : else of force. In case of breach, the amount of the Bond to be liquidated damages in favour of said city. Alt est (L.S.) (L.S) (L.S.) Ji-'sriKviN(, Oath ^v Sureties. State ofCtiwr^ia, ) Fulton County, j Personalh- appeared before the undersigned Sureties on the above Bond, who being duly sworn, depose and say that they are worth the amount of the said Bond over and above all debts and liabilitits. and over and aboNe the amount of homestead or exemption allowed by the laws of said State. Sworn to and subscribed before me this j . ^^189. • - Akki davit. '> do solemnly swear that I have never been convicted of violation ol any of the laws of the State regulating the liquor traffic, nor of any City Ordinances providing for granting Retail Liquor and Beer Licences, or for the conduct of licensed saloons. That there are no indictments pending nor any accusation on file against me in any State or City Courts for violation of any such law or ordinance. Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of 109 L'l'he petition, when granted, is endorsed with the words— "Approved, with the right reserved by the City to revoke and withdraw the licence upon fiiilure to comply with, or a violation of any of the Ordinances of the City enacted lor the government of the same"— and the necessary official signatures.] t 4 ' INDEX. Adiilteralicjii, 46, 109, 253 Agencies— for sale of liciuoi in prohibited places, 43, 43, 107 Alcohol — use of raw, for drinking, 17, 249, 298 Apothecaries (sec I )ruggists) Vrkansas — local option in, 366 - S Arrests — statistics of, liable to be misleading, 39, 109 IJeer— increased consumption of, 10, 198, 276, ^283, 2oy, 362, 392 U.S. tax on dealers in, 17, 43—4 sale of, inore affectetl than spirits by prohibition, 45, 108, iq8 reduced licence fee for, 7S— 80 spirits sold under cover of, 149, 265, 266, 344, 361, 370 Blackmail, 88, 160 1 Jonds • of licensees, 86 sureties on, 86 brewers as sureties, 300 Bootleggers (sec Pocket Peddlers) Boston (sci: Massachusetts) special features of liquor trade in, 60 British Columbia, 408 California, 308 — 315 local self-gpvernment as to liquor, 308 wine-growing in, 308 .San B'rancisco — ordinances of, 309 — 10 large number of saloons in, 310 movement for high licence, 311 — 2 corner groceries in, 311 — 2 police statistics of, 312—3 high suicide rate in, 313 nationality of saloonkeepers in, 313 local prohibition in, 313—4 Pasadena, 314 Riverside, 315 Pomona, 315 Canada, 371-408 (si\- New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec) local option in, 53 Scott Act, 53, 371—2, 374, 375, 376, . 377, 378—40'^ agitation for prohibition in, 371, 373—4 Royal Commission on li(iuor traffic in, 374, 376, 378, 379, 3^^ 1 7'' Canada, criminal slalistic^ in, 3 (3-7 industrial deseiopment of, i3oi— 91, r.-, 399 Cider, 116 Civil Damage l.uw, 91 — 4 comprehensive, in Nebraska, 92, 2;3— 4 operation of, 9;— 4, 250-9, 302 for selling to minors, 89 to drunkards, after notice, 90—1, Clergy — total abstinence among, 6 Climate — relation of, to drinking, 1 1 Clubs- growth of, 9 in Maine, 1 14 in Kansas, i ^4 in Rhode Island, 17). Colorado, 304- -307 law of. 305—7 Colorado springs operation of jjrohibilioa in, 304 — 3 Greelej-, 304, 305 Denver, 307 licences refused in a few coiiniics, 307 Committee of Fifty to investigate li(|uor (juestion in U.S., 2 noie Compensation, 12, 78 Connecticut — licensing system of, 363-6 licensing authorities elected by legis- lature, 364 Constitutional amendment>— votes on proposed, 30 Crime — increase of, 20 note how far drinking a cause of, 47—50 Criminals — proportion of, to poimlation, by States, 19, 20 Dakota (North and South), 3's Direct veto, 52 — 6, 255 Divorce — intemperance a cause for, 95 Druegists— illicit sale of lic|uor by, 43—4, 60, 106— 7, 112, 161, 162—3, 201, 206 sale of liquor by, for special [lurposes ^ 96 Drug-store saloons, 41, 96, 106, i6S Drunkards- habitual, treatment of, 94—5, 218—9 sale of liquor to, forbidden, 89 notice not to sell to, 90 428 Lv/)/:.\: Diimkenness— ratii) of arrests for, to P'>pul;uion, 7} piinisliiiiciu for, -14, ^46, 284, 338—9 ill Massacliusetts, jii- j .'I cau^e fcjr cii\on:ij, 95 Duiikiii Act sic Ontario, (Jufbei;) I'lnforcenient uf law — ilcpt:iKli.nt on popular .supjiort, 1 ;, 14, iSo, 2^, 300—1, .544 ililTiculty of maintaining private efforts for, if;i, 172, 177, 301 affected by politics, -'34, ;,S6 by niiinicip.'ii corruption, 301 .Npecial officers for, 02 note, 1S4, 365, 3S4, ^^1 ICnforLeiufnt of State prohibition, strict, not ;ll\v;^y^ fa\ cured by pruhiintionists, Ml 33—4 'I tf, 117, 178 effect on, of existiii:; liiiiitcil application of law, 2(^ general remarks on, 35—7, 171 — 2, 1S2 in rural distrii'ts, ;,7, 115, i ;:>, 15; report of coniiiiittee in Massacliusetts as to, 187—91 State police tor, I'j, 113, 137, i;ij, 136, ,177 iLiiforcenient of local pr jhi!)ition, ^g, J55, 319—20, 370 Female >ufhagc, rg iiotr, 132 Fines — applic.'ition of, 1.5, 254 Forfeiture {sec Licences) Ceorgin, 3k'i— 335 special features in, 316 local option law of, 316—7 local licpior Acts in, 317 corporation Acts, 318 area and popuLition o^, 318 local prohibition in, extent o^, operation of, 319 — 20 Atlanta— prohibition in, ;2i hjcal option cainpai:;!! in, ',21 — n iiuestion as to benefit of prohibition to working classes in, 322 — 3 "pig" tr.ide in, 323—5 alleged increase of drinking in, under proliiliition, 3^3 — •; rejection of prohibition in, liirensing law of, 326—8 efficient enforcement of law, 32S- statistics of, 331 Hciuor ordinance of 416— 55 Athens municipal control of liipior trade 332—3 general liquor laws of, 334—5 ■t'lrand Juries — ;i8 j25 unwilling to io'Iict in liquor cases, 291 Groceries — High licence, 61 — ?. > cjpposition of prohibitionists 10, 61 — 3, 249 attitude of liquor trade towards, ''",—4, 249 alleged advantages of, ''4-5, igy, Joo, -47. 249. 256, 289— s«' reduced numbers, 65—7 better police control, 68 ■stricter compliance wiili the law, 68 diminisheil political iiitluence uf the saloon, 69 increased revenue iiiuler, 6c,, 7,,, i.,4, 273, 290 application of revenue under, 70 — 1 question as to effect of, on drinking, 71—5. 243—50 general opinion favourable to, 75 — 7, 240, 249-50, 257 -8 prohibitory, 71, 2?^;, .71, ;iS. 334, 356 Illinois la\\ of, 285 — 9 high licence in, 289 — 00, 295 local option in, .:'?6, 2114 jirohibitioii in certain places, 295 Chicago - li(luor ordinances of, 288 — 9 licences in, t'6, 290 — 1 operations of Citizens' League in, 29 1 —2 police statistics of, .?i.i ', Lake, 293—4 Iowa, 14Q -T72 (sec also I'rohibition Stales) law of, 149—53 enforcement of law in, 15^ in 1885, 153 jiotc area, population, etc., of, 154 ])avenport, 155 — 6 Sioux City, 156 — 7 Council liluffs, 157—9 Cedar Kaoids, 159 — 61 Des Moines, i6i 3 other towns, 156 State police in, 156, 162 liquor i)rosecutions in, 163 — 4 politics and prohibition in, 164 — 7 proposals to alter the law, 164 — 5 disposition of liquor-sellers luaciiuiesce in prohibition, 167 general results of proliibition in, 168 — 71 opium in, 169 — 70 I lines— reluctant to convict in liciuor cases, 14, 136, 162, 233, 234, ■'-1 -^'jt J' ,00 licjuor-selling in, ;5 — 6, 289, 360 ^i I — 2, contra, 112, 257 note, 259 Kansas, 125— 14S (sec also Prohibition States) law of, 125 — 30 position of prohibition in, 131 — 2 area and population of, 132 — 3 /.yp/:.\: 429 Kansas, ciiroicciULiit of law in, generally. larger 'J9— 4^- clubs, I -^^ ilc^triiclion dT liquor In, 1-/1 violation of law in most of tlie tcjun>. i;f)— 3 strict enforcement in 'I'opeka, ; Laurence, 140 State police in, 1 ^7, i \() educational inlUience of law in, prohiljition and crime in, 1.(4— comparison of, witii Nebraska, 1.(7 'lopeka ami Onuilia, 147-0 li(|nor dealers paying U.S. tax in, 148 Kentucky, \^h j,y, s])ecial jecislation in. -^46 forbidden by new Constitution, 346 licence l.'iw of, 346 3 local option in, 348 — y oiieration of, 34^—50 Law and Order Leagues, 14, 9^,, 177, 194, 231. 26 J, J06, 2yi, -03, ]oo' Legal procedure - dilatory, 14, 11 1, iSo Legislation more readily passed in America than in England, 15 liquor, in Congress, J5--6 Licence fees — application of, 86 Licensing authorities, £1—3 power> of, 82 — 5 objections to popular election of, 81, 82, S3. S4 I .icences — statutory limitation on number of, 77, . i;*3. .-'y-'. 4"3, 403. 4''j5 hnutation of, bv licensing authority, 77; 83, 226, 228-f,. 277 forbidden outside business quarter of city, 78, 207. 242 -5, 326, 329 near church or school, 85, 307, 317, 335. 350. 360. t/''^; 401 question as to elTect of reducing luunber of, 78 objections to selection in grant of, 83, 235 excessive reduction in number of, dis- approved, 236, 23- different classes of, 85 forfeiture of, 87— S disqualification for olitaining, 38 I'-nglish system of attaching, to premises appro\ed of, 362 proposal to abolish retail, 329—30 Lit I nor — little use of, at table in America. 3, 6 use of. by clerks and employees, 7 by constables, £ consumption of, in L'.S. and in _ England, 16 in Canada, 392 amount of, produced, 17, 18 effect of prohibition on consumption of, 38, 40, 1 63 as a_ cause of crime, 47, 395—7 imnishment for illegal sale of, 95 Liquor dealers — political inlluence of. 27, 234, 38 > paying U.S. tax. 17, r 3 in I'rohibition States, 42 — ;, 106— 7, 148 periodically fined in prohibition towns, I 1;,, T ;/, 133, 15''— 8, 163 tendenc\' of. in .some ca>es to aciiuie^ce in prohibition, 167 Liquor tpiestion — different .■i>pects of, in America anti ICnglautl, 2— 1 ^ agitation on, 13 Local authorities- withdrawal from, tjf control o\er police and licensing. 82 danger of entrusting, with licensinj; powers, S3. 304 Local option, 51 — n.j general acceptance of, in principle. 12 opposition of prijhibitionists to, 51 — 2 tjuesiion as to area of adoption of, 53 — 4. 3,02 different modes of applying principle of. 5'') — 3 enforcement of, 58—60 (.VtV nhv En- forcement) yote> taken on side issues, 203—4 increase of licence fee by, 295, 296 . ^Laine. too -124 (si'c also Prohibition States) p.iyers of L'.S. liquor ' ix in, 43 — 4 law of. 100 — 2 by uhom enforced, 102 Portlanil, IJ3 — i.j liangor, 112— 3 State police in, 113 other towns, 114 — 5 seaside lesorts, 1 15 country districts, 115 total abstinence in, 103— 4 temperance instruction in, 104 ililatory legal procedure in, 1 r 1 cider in, 116 politics and prohil)iiion in, 116— 8 election of .sheriff. iiS — 9 strength of prohibition party in, 11,1 crime, insanity, and pauperism in, 1 21,1 — 2 raid in Lewiston, 122 — 4 population, etc., of, 115 >ioie Manitoba. 390 summary of liquor laws of, 407—8 ^L-\ryland, 33'i— 339 no general liquor law in, 336 special legislation in, 336 ' local option in, 336 Baltimore — licence law of, 336— 8 reduceil number of licences in, 338 statistics of. 338—9 Massachusetts, \'i-j — 224 prohibition in, 187—91 vote on const:' ational, 187, 224 committee of LegisluUire on, 187 — 9t 430 LXD/.X. Mas>acluist;Us, Stale policu in, 107, k/d local ojitioii ill, -^j, 54, p,i, 'loo— y annual \oW compulsory, 191 statistics of voting, joi — 2 tendency t'j reverie majority, 202, •■'4—5 election often held on fal^e issue, 2(,! enforcement of, ■on—i, 20^, 205 — 9 licence law of, 101 — 7 limitation on niunlier of licences, 193 Law and Order League, 194 arRinnents respecting high licence, 199, 2<-K t lioston — licence fees in, 192 — j non-residents arrested for drunken- ness in, 195, :'-'!, J22 statistics of arrests, etc., in, 190, 196, I9S, 2' '9, 22 1 '■metropolitan" police force in, 198-9 eiiforcemeiU of law in, 194, 198 local option voting in, 2o_^ — 4 luimher of licences in, 210 Worcester, 195, 204, 205, 208 Cambriilge, 205 --7 ■"no licence" in, 2M5 -6 statistics of, :■(/> - 7 other cities, 202 note, 203, 204, 205, 207-9 . druggists in, 201 puni>linieiit of drunkenness in, 211— 4, abolition of tine for, 212 objects of new law, 213—4 its working, 219 — 21 probation (officers in, 214 7 operation of probation system, 216, 217 leformatories in, 218 treatment of habitual drunkards in, 21S - 9 hospital for inebriates, 219 statistics of crime and drunkenness in, jjo — I, 222 strength o( i)r(Dhibiiion vote in, 223 — 4 Michigan, 260^267 prohibition repealed in, 260 vote on constitutional, 260 local option in, 260 — 2 little success of, 261 — 2 regulating law of, 262- 4 statistics of licences in, 264 strong prohibition vote in, 267 Detroit, 265 — 6 lax eiiforcemeiit of law in, 265 Minnesota, 23S — 252 local option in, 23S— 9 licence law of, 239—40 favourable opinicjn of high licence in, 240, 249 --so prison statistics of, 246 foreign immigrants in, 246—7, 24S — 9, -5' effect of high licence in, on drinking, 248—9 low rate of crime and pauperism in, 250—1 Minnesota, insanity in, 251—2 St. Paul, 241 — 2 statistics of, 245—6 Minneapolis, 242 " iiatrol limit" law of, 54:'— 5 reduction in numl)er of saloons in, 243 beneficial operation of law in, 243 -5 statistics of, 245—6 Minors- feeling against Use of liipior by, ('1, 7 sale of liiiuor to, forbidden, 89 punishment for, S9 Missouri, 267 — 277 proposal for prohibitory amendment to Constitution, 267 — 8 restricted number of licences in, 267, 271 local option in, the law. 268 operation of, generally ineffective, 270 — I, 272 violation of law l)y druggists, 271—2 dissatisfaction of prohibitionists with, 271 — 2 licensing law, 268—9 no licences issued in some counties, 272 high licence in, 273 -4 St. Louis, 274 6 Oerman.i and brewing in, 275, 276 dissatisfaction with municipal ad- ministration of, 275 — 6 statistics of drunkenness and crimt in, ^76 Kansas City, 276 —7 new licensing system in, 276—7 statistics of, 277 Nebraska, 252 — 259 first State to adopt high licence, 252 vote on Constitutional amendment in. 252 law of, 252 — 4 high licence in, prohibitive operation of, in rural districts, 254—5 general approval of, 257 expressions of opinion on, 257 — S refusal of licences in, 255 Omaha, 147—8, 255, 256, 257, 259 Lincoln, 255, 256 forfeiture of licences in, 257 civil damage law in, 258—9 Negroes — liquor question as affecting, 54 — 5, 320. 349 . , New Hrunswick, 377 — 380 prohibition in, 372 Scott Act in, 374, 377—8, 396, 398, 400 summary of liquor law of, 402—3 New Hampshire, 33—35 New York, 358 — 363 licence law of, 358 — 9 local veto in, 359 New York City, rules of licensing board of, 359 — 60 licences in, 360 reduced number of on-licences, 361 statistics of, 361 — 2 I I I k /yDEX, 431 i New \\)v\<. Brooklyn, 563 Nonli-Wt^^t 'I'eiTitorics, v;i Noruegiaii system -- I>r.)i)osil to iiitro.Iuce, i;i Massa- cliusetts. ii,; nod: IS ova Scotia, ^75 - ;;; ScOlt Act ill, 375, ■;7rj Mininiary of liquor law of, 400 -2 NuNance- illicit li.|uoi >liop declared tu he a, - •Ji Ohio, c?7t;— 2^5 licences uiirjoii>tituuoiial, >7d 110 restriction o,, number uf li„i;or. sellers, 270 ' tax payabk- !,y li.iuur.sellcrs, l;., law of, 271^ - , .J Coluiuhus, I'o.j -I ia.v adniiiiisiraiiou in, 2i;o — i Cincinnati, j£i— 3 noii.parti>.in police commissioner-, of 2t)l ' difficulty orenfon;iii- law in, 22--- statistics of. ji i ' - o crime and pauperism. 284 — ^ Oiitari(3, ;^S4— V'o Enforcement wf Lw by provincial odicers, ^84 — 5 Scott Act in, 3S4. 3S5 -7,3^0-90 Dunkin .-Vet m, -37 statistics of drunkenness in, -io licensing law of, 404 7 Toronto, ;.?8 Opium, lOQ--;,,, 30-, ;.4 '• Original Packajje Decision," - ■, iji J'auperisin — statistics of, tuitrusiworiliy, -5 note 2t;5 tiote ' Paupers — proportion of, to population, by States 19, -JO ' Pennsylvania, 2_'5— ^37 movement for'local option in. js vote on prohibitory amendment in, 22=, law of, 1226—6 redu<:ed number of licences under 229—30 advantage-, claime.d, .•74 Popul.iti )n— per square mile, by States, 19. au percentage of urban, 19, 20 Prince Edward Island, 380—382 J'robation ofticers, 214 -7 Prohibition, 21-47 (i^f «/J<» Enforcement) i grounds of opposition to, 11. 12 what it is, in .Vrnerica, 21—5, 134—5 movement for, in C<'ngre.s>."a:;— 6 desire for a more extended application of, 25- 6 supported by non-abstainers, 27, 117, votes on Constitutional, 30 question as to educational inlUience of. iS, 141— :-i efTect of, on total consumption, 30—41, 104, 168 — 9, 135—6, IC/< on circumstances of working clas.ses, 40, 322—3 on general prosperity, 143-4, 170—1, 322 alleged increase of home .Irinking under, 40, 168 report of Massachusetts Cummittee on, 188 — 91 Prohibitionists (see Third Party Prohibi- tionists) activity of, 13, 1,6, 130- 1, tj^ ditTerences among, 27— y. 31—2, 223, Prohibition States, 32 statistics of, as to population, crime, and pauperism, 34 — 5 taxpaying liquor ilealers in, 4^-4 liquor sellers periodically hned in, 11 • ,, 137. 156-8, 163 I seudo-temperance drinks, 46, 140, 320 Public dinners — e.vclusioii of wine at, 6 Quebec, 383 iJunkin Act in, 383 Scott Act in, 383 summary of liquor law of, 403—4 Reformatories, 218 Rhode Island, 173— iS6 prohibition in, 173—82 Providence, 173, 174—5, '85-6 ^Newport, 174, 176 other towns, 174, 175-7 spotters, ' 176 ineffective prosecutions in, 176, i6u~i licence law of, 182 — 5 Royal Commission on liquor trafiic in Canada (sea Canada) Saloons (see Liquor dealers)— performances, etc., forbidden in, ,j6 Scott Act («^ Canada, New Prunswick, iSfova Scotia, Ontario, guebec) Screens — forbidden, 95 432 /.v />/■:. v. SoiUli Carolina, -;-o — '.-j '• iJispeiisary l.nvv" of, .',50 -; circumstances under wliich iias>e - 7 ('harli;-ton, .^S4— .5 .Suiilliitrn Siaios-- local option in, 5.', 54 — 5 .Statistics — of (huiikennos and < rime, not too nuich reliance to be placed on, yj, '09. -'45. ■■<4^'—9 .Sunday closiiig - ucner.illy the rule ni America, .S3 (lisi-e.i^arij of, 83, 276, -^Sj, 362 contra, J, 232, 329, 3,S3 leetotallers, t, 103 — 4 "i emperance in-^tructinn," 9^)— 9, 104 1 ontrmersy respecting text-books, 97, object of promoters of, 97 Mibntaiice of their te.ichini;, 90 prominence desired for, ,9 J'exas, 369 — -370 local option, required by Con-titutioii, 309 _ operation of, ncjt i^enerally successful. ,. ;^7o licensin.'i law of, 3''^ — -j" I'liird I'arty I'rohiiiitionists, 27 — 30, iifi, I 19, 166, 2J3 strength of, at J're>idential elections, 30 Treating, 9, -44—5 forbidden in Nebraska, 96 \'ermont, 33—35 \'irginia, 339—34^' N'irginia, local option in, 339 -40, 343 restricted operati(jn of, 3h- 5 licence law of, 340 — 3 special legislation in, 34; Richmond, 345 Wealth ~- statistics (jf. 39 W hisky- thc national drink in America, 10 Wine- jiroduction i;f, in United .'^t.-aes, i-. in (Jalifornia, 300 Wisconsin, r!95 — 303 local option in, 29^ power to raise licence fees by, 29; operation of, 298 law of, 296 - .-'. foreign immigrati-2. " temper.uice instruction," 303 position of pruhibitioii in, 301 -2 Witnesses — reluctant to give e\idencc, 1 (, r's, 206, :^^'^, 379, 385 W omen — ti>lal abstinence among, ''1, 7 eniploymeiU of, in barrooms sometime- forbidden, 7. 9-5, 307 sale .it liquor to, s'.>. '77. ." '-' 1 rui.NTEU l.V C.\SSEIX & COMIANV, LlMIIF-f, l,.\ Ulil.I.t SaL\AGE, LoNDcN, E.C. Selections from Cassell f Company's Publications, IUuatrntc&, yinc-^rt, anb otljci* ITolumcs. Abbeys and Churches of England and Wales, The: Descriptive, Historical, Pictorial. Series 1 1. 21s. A Blot of Ink. 'riniishaccl by (J and Pai;. Fhan( kk. 5s. Adventure, The World of. Fully lilustr.tted. In Tiircc Vols. gs. each. Africa and its Explorers, The Story of. I'.y Dk. Roiii-.kt IJkuwn, F.L.S. Illustrated. Vols. I. and 11., 7s. 6d. u.-ilK. Agrarian Tenures. Hy the Rt. Hon. (1. Shaw I.kkkvki', MP. los. 6(1. Anthca. IJy C^lii.e Cassavktti (a Rnssi.m). A Slury of llic Greek War of Independence. C/icaP Edition. 5s. Arabian Nights Entertainments, Cassell's Pictorial. los. Cd. Architectural Drawing. I2y R. Piik.n6 Siikks. Illustrated. los. 6d. Art The Magazine of. Yearly Vol. With 12 PiioloKravures, Klcliing-, S:c., and about 400 Illustrations. 16s. Artistic Anatomy. Hy Pi of. M. Duval. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. Astronomy, The Dav^'n of. A Study of lh» Astronomy and MytliolcKy of the Ancient Egyptians, By J. Norman Lockyer, F.R.S , F.R.A.S., &C. Illustrated. 2is. Atlas, The Universal. A New and Cuinpleie General .\tlas of the World, with 117 Pages of Maps, in Colours, antrations. Three Vols., 4to, £1 7s.; Li/ost irce on application to tin- Piil)lishi:rs. Colonist's Medical Handbook, The. By K. A. P)AkT(in,.M K.l'.S. 2s.6d. Colour. By i'rul. A. 11. Cm kch. With Coloured Plateb. 3s. 6d. 50. 8.y3 Selections from Cassell ^ Company's Publications. los. 6d. M- Columbus, The Career of. By Charles Elton, Q.C Cookery, A Year's. Uy Phyllis Hkowne. 3s. 6ci. Cookery, CasseJl's Shilling. 384 pages, limp cloth, is. Cookery, Vegetarian. Hy A. G. Payne, is. 6d. Cooking by Gas, The Art of. By Marie J. Sugg. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. Combe, George, The Se ect Works of ssued by Authority of the Combe Trustees. Popular Edition, is. each, net. TheContitutiou of Man. I Science and Relieion. Moral Philosophy. I D.scusBions on Education- Cottage Gardening, Poultry, Bees, Allotments, Food, House, Window and Town Gardens. Edited by W. Robinson, F.L.S., Author of "The English Flower Garden." Fully Illustrated. Half- yearly Volumes, I. and II. Cloth, 2S. 6d. each. Countries of the World, The. By Rodekt Brown, M.A., Ph.D., &c. Complete in Six Vols., with about 750 Illustrations. 4to, 7s. 6d. each. Cyclopaedia, Cassell's Concise. Brought down to the latest date. With about 600 Illustrations. Cheap Edition. 7s. 6d. Cyclopaedia, Cassell's Miniature. Containing 30,000 subjects. Cloth, 2s. 6d. ; halt-roxburgh, 4s. Delectable Duchy, The. Some Tales of East Cornwall. By Q. 6s. Dickens, Character Sketches from. First, Second, and Third Series. With Six Original Drawings in each by F. Barnard. 21s. each. Dick Whittir.gton, A Modern. By James Payn. In One Vol., 6s. Dog, Illustrated Book of the. By Vero Shaw, B.A. With a8 Coloured Plates. Cloth bevelled, 35s. ; half- morocco, 45s. Domestic Dictionary, The. Illustrated. Cloth, 7s. 6d. Dore Bible, The. With 200 Full-page Illustrations by Dor6. 15s. Dor^ Don Quixote, The. With about 400 Illustrations by Gustave Dor6. Cheap Edition. Bevelled boards, gilt edges, los. 6d. Dor^ Gallery, The. With 250 Illustrations by Dor6. 4to, 42s. Dora's Dante's Inferno. Illustrated by Gustave Dok6. With Preface by A. J. Butle:\ Cloth gilt or buckram, 7s. 6d. Dora's Dante's Purgatory and Paradise. Illustrated by Gustavb Dor6. Cheap Edition. 7s. 6d. Dore's Milton's Paradise Lost. Illustrated by Dor6. 4to, 21s. Dr. Dumdny's Wife. A Novel. By Maurus J'n./»:. 6s. Dulce Domum. Rhymes and Songs for Children. Edited by John FARMhR, Editor of " Gaudeanius," &c. Old Notation and Words, 5s. N.B.— The words of the Songs in "Dulce Domum' (with the Airs both in Tonic Sol-.'a and Old Notation) can be had in Two Parts, 6d. each. £arth. Our, and its Story. By L . Robert Brown, F.L.S. With Coloured Plates and numerous Wood Engravings. Three Vols. gs. each. Edinburgh, Old and New. With 600 Illustrations. Three Vols. gs. each. Egypt: Descriptive, Historical, and Picturesque. By Prof G. Ebers, With 800 Original Engravings. Popular Edition. Electricity in the Service of Man. Illustrated Edition. los. 6d. Electricity, Practical. By Prof. W. E. Ayrton. 7s. 6d. Encyclopaedic Dictionary, The. In Fourteen Divisional Vols., xos.6d. each ; or Seven Vols., half-morocco, 21s. each; half-russia, 25s. England, Cassell's Illustrated History of. With i.ooo Illustrations. Ten Vols., 4I0, gs. each. Revised Edition. Vols. 1. to VI. gs. eat,):. English Dictionary, Cassell's. Giving definitions of more than 100,000 Wo.ds and Phrases. Cloth, 7s. 6d. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. English History, The Dictionary of. Cheap Edition. «os. 6d. English Literature. Library of. By Prof. Hbnry Morley. CompJett Ki Fi\e Vols., 73. 6d. each. In Two Vol i. 42s. New and Revised Selections from Cassell ^ Company s Publications. English Literature, Motley's First Sketch of. Revised Edition. 7s. 6d. English Literature, The Story of. By Anna Buckland. 3s. 6d. English Writers. By Prof. Henry Morlky. Vols. I. to X. 5s. each. Etiquette of Good Society. New Edition. Edited and Revised by Lady Colin Campbell, is. ; cloth, is. 6d. Fairway Island. By Horace Hutchinson. With 4 Full-page Plates. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. Faith Doctor, The. A Novel. By Dr. Edward Eggleston. 6s. Family Physician, The. By Eminent Physicians and Surgeons. New and Revised Edition. Cloth, ais. ; Roxburgh, 25s. Father Stafford. A Novel. By Anthony Hope. 6s. Field Naturalist's Handbook, The. By the Revs. J. G. Wood and Theodore Wood. Cheap Edition, as. fid. Figuier's Popular Scientific Works. With Several Hundred Illustra- tions in each. Newly Revised and Corrected. 3s. 6d. each. The Human Race. | Mammalia. | Ocean World. The Insect World. Reptiles and Birds. World before the Deluge. The Vegetable World. Flora's Feast. A Masque of Flowers. Penned and Pictured by Walter Crane. With 40 Pages in Colours. 5s. Football, The Rugby Union Game. Edited by Rev. F. Marshall. Illustrated. 7s. 6d. Eraser, John Druminond. By Philalethes. A Story of Jesuit Intrigue in the Church of England. 5s. Garden Flowers, Familiar. By Shirley Hibberd. With Coloured Plates by F. E. Hulme, F.L.S. Complete in Five Series. I2s. 6d. each. Gardening, Cassell's Popular. Illustrated. Four Vols. 5s. each. George Saxon, The Reputation of. By Mqrley Roberts. 5s. Gleanings from Popular Authors. Two Vols. With Original Illus- trations. 4to, gs. each. Two Vols, in One, 15s. Gulliver's Travels. With 88 Engravings by Morten. Cheap Edition, Cloth, 3s. 6d. ; cloth gilt, 5s. Gun and its Development, The. By W. W. Greener. With 500 Illustrations. los. 6d. Health at School. By Clement Dukes, M.D., B.S. 7s. 6d. Heavens, The Story of the. By Sir Robert Stawell Ball, LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.A.S. With Coloured Plates. Popular Edition. ias.6d. Heroes of Britain in Peace and War. With 300 Original Illus- trations. Two Vols., 3s. 6d. each ; or One Vol., 7s. 6d. History, A Foot-note to. Eight Years of Trouble in Samoa. By Robert Louis Stevenson. 6s. Historic Houses of the United Kingdom. Profusely Illustrated. 10s. 6d. Home Life of the Ancient Greeks, The. Translated by Alice ZiMMERN. Illustrated. 7s. 6d. Horse, The Book of the. By Samuel Sidney. Thoroughly Revised and brought up to date by James Sinclair and W. C. A. Blrw. With 17 Full-page Collotype Plates of Celebrated Horse« of the Day, and numerous other Illustrations. Cloth, 15s. Houphton, Lord: The Life, Letters, and Friendships of Richard Monckton Milnes, First Lord Houghton. By T. Whmvss Reid. In Two Vols., with Two Portraits. 32s. Household, Cassell's Book of the. Complete in Four Vols. 5s. eacL Four Vols, in Two, half- morocco, 253. Hygiene and Public Health. By B. Authur Whitblbggk, M. D. 7s. 6d. Selections from Cassell ^ Company*! Publications. India, Cassell's History of. Ry James Grant. With about 400 Illustrations. Two Vols,, gs. each. One Vol., 15s. In-door Amusements, Card Games, and Fireside Fun, Cassell's Book of. Cheap Edition, as. Into the Unknown: A Romance of Soulh Africa. By Lawkencb l''l,KTCIIKK. 4S. Iron Pirate, The. A Plain Tale of Strange Hai)penin};s on the Sea. By Max Pemberton. Illustrated. 5s. Island Nights' Entertainments. By R. L. Stevenson. Iliuslrated, 6s. Italy from the Fall of Napoleon I. in 1815 to 1890. By J. W. Pkouyn. Neiu and Cheaper Edition. 3s. fid. Joy and Health. By Maktellius. 3s. 6d. £ldition de Luxe, Ti. 6A. Kennel Guide, The Practical. By Dr. Gordon Stables, is. " La Bella," and Others. Being Certain Stories Recollected by Egerton Castle, Author of " Consecjuences." 6s. Ladies' Physician, The. By a London Physician. 6s. Lady's Dressing-room, The. Translated rom the French of Baroness Stakke by Lady Colin Cami'bell. 3s. 6d. Leona. By Mrs. Molesworfh. 6s. Letters, the Highway of, and its Echoes of Famous Footsteps. By Thomas Archer. Illustrated. 10s. 6d, Letts's Diaries and other Time-saving Publications published exclusively by Casskll & Comi'ANV. {A list free on a/>piication.) Little Minister, The. By J. M. Barrie. Illustrated Edition. 6s. Locomotive Engine, The Biography of a. By Henry P'rith. 5s. Loftus, Lord Augustus, The Diplomatic Reminiscences of. First and Second Series. Two Vols., each with Portrait, 32s. each. London, Greater. By Euward VValford. Two Vols. With about 400 Illustrations, gs. each. London, Old and New. Six Vols., each containing about 200 Illustrations and Maps. Cloth, gs. each. London Street Arabs. By Mrs. H. M. Stanley. Illustrated, 58. Medicine Lady, The. \\y L. T. Meaue. In (3ne Vol., 6s. Medicine, Manuals for Students of. [A List forwarded post free.) Modern Europe, A History of. Bv C. A. Fyffe, M.A. Complete in Three Vols., with full-page Illustrations, 7s. 6d. each. Mount Desolation. An Australian Romance. I'.y W. Carlton Dawe. 5s. Music, Illustrated History of. By Emil Naumann. Edited by the Rev. Sir F. A. Gore Ouseley, Bart. Illustrated. Two Vols. 31s. fid. Musical and Dramatic Copyright, The Law of. By Euward Cutlicr, Thomas Eustace Smith, and Frederic E. Weatheklv, Barristers-at-Law. 3s. fid. Napier, Life and Letters of the Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph, Bart.,LL.D., &c. By A. C. EwALD, F.S.A, :>< w and Revised Edition, 7s. fid. National Library, Cassell's. I.» Volumes, Paper covers, 3d. ; cloth, fid. {A Complete List 0/ the Vpltanespostjrce on application.) Natural History, Cassell's Concise. By V.. Perceval Wright, M.A., M.D., F,L.S, With several Hundred Illustrations, 7s. fid. Natural History, Cassell's New. Edited by Prof. P. Martin i)i'N(AN, M.B., F.R.S., F.G..S. Complete in Six Vols. With about 3,000 lUuslratiuns. Cloth, gs. each. Selections from Cassell ^ Company's Pullicaiions. Nature's Wonder Workers, By Kate R. LovKr.i,. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. New England Boyhood, A. J5y EuwARn E. Halr. 3s. 6J. Nursing for the Home and for the Hospital, A Handbook of. Hy Cathekink J. Wood. Cheap Edition, is. 6d. ; cloth, 2s. Nursing of Sick Children, A Handbook for the. I'.y Catherinh J. Wood. 2s. 6d. O'DriscoH's Weird, and other Stories. By A. Wrrnrr. 5s. Odyssey, The Modern ; or, Ulysses up to Date. Cloth gilt, los, 6d. Ohio, The New. A .Story of East aiui West. By Edwaro E. H.ai.e. 6s. Oil Painting, A Manual of. By the Hon. John Collier, as. bd. Our Own Country. Six Vols. With 1,200 Illustrations. 7s. 6d. each. Out of the Jaws of Death. By Frank Barrett. In One Vol., 6s. Painting, The English School of. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. Painting, Practical Guides to. With Coloured Plates :— Marine Painting. 5s. Animal Painting. 5s. China Painting. 5s. Figure Painting. 7s. 6d. Elementary Flower Paint- ing. 3s. Tree Painting. 5s. Water-Colour Painting. 5s. Neutral Tint. 5s. Sei'IA, in Two Vo's., 3s. each ; or ill One Vol., 5s. Flowers, and How to Paint 'Jhrm. 5s. Paris, Old and New. A Narrative of its History, its People, and its Pl.aces. By II. Sutherland Edwards. Profusely Illustrated. Vol. I.,9S. Peoples of the World, The. In Six Vols. By Dr. Robert I5rown. Illustrated. 7s. 6d. each. Perfect Gentleman, The. By the Rev. A. Smytiie Palmer, D.D. 3s. 6d. Phillips, Watts, Artist and Playwright. By Miss K. Watts Piiii.LifS. With 32 Plates. los. 6d. Photography for Amateurs, i'ly T. C. Hepworth. Enlait^e i and Rei'ised Edition. Illustrated, is.; or cloth, is. 6d, Phrase and Fable, Dictionary of. By the Rev. Dr. Brewer. Cheap Edition, Enlarged, cloth, 3s. 6d. ; or with leather h.ick, 4s. 6d. Picturesque America. Complete in Four Vols., with 48 E.\(iuisite Steel Plates and about 800 Original Wood EuKrivinss. £2 2S. each. Picturesque Canada. With 600 Original Illustrations. Two Vols. /"G 6s. the Set. * Picturesque Europe. Complete in Five Vols. Each containing 13 Exquisite Steel Plates, from Original Drawings, and nearly 200 Original Illustrations. Cloth, £21; half-morocco, £31 los. ; morocco gilt,£52ios. Popular Edition. In Five Vols., i8s. each. Picturesque Mediterranean, The. With Magnificent Original Illustrations by the leading Artists of the D.ay. Compleie in Two Vols. £2 2S. e.ach. Pigeon Keeper, The Practical. By Lewis Wright. Illustrated. 3s. 6d! Pigeons, The Book of. I5y Robert Fulton. Edited and Arranged by E. Wright. With 50 Coloured Plates, 31s. 6d. ; half morocco, £2 2s. Pity and of Death, The Book of. By Pierre Loti. Translated bv r. P. O'Connor, M.P. 5s. Planet, The Story of Our. By T. G. Bonnev, D.Sc, I.L.D., F.R.S., F.S.A., F.G.S. With Six Coloured Plates and Maps and about 100 Illustrations. 31s. 6d. Playthings and Parodies. Short Stories by Barry Pain. 5s. Poems, Aubrey de Vere's. A Selection. Edited by J. Drnnis. 3s. 6d. Poetry, The Nature and Elements of. By E. C, Stedman. 6s. Poets, Cassell's Miniature Library of the. Price is. each Vol. Portrait Gallery, The Cabinet. First, Second, 1 bird, and Fourth Series. f*?'}'^°?'^'"'"Ji 36 Cabinet Photographs of Emin^-nl Men and Women. With Biographical Sketches, i^s. each. Dead Man's Rook. The Splendia Spur. The Biue Pavilions. Selections from Cassell % Company' i Publications. Poultry Keeper, The Practical. By L. Wright. Illustrated. 38. 6d. Poultry, The Book of. liy Lewis Wright. Popular Edition. los. 6d. Poultry, The Illustrated Book of. By Lewis Wkight. With Fifty Coloured Plates. Ne7v and Revised Edition. Cloth, 31s. 6d. Q's Works, Uniform Edition of. 5s. each. " "" " a he Astonishing History of Troy Town. "I Saw 'i'hree Ships," and other Winter's Titles. Noughts and Crosses. Queen Summer ; or, The Tourney of the Lily and the Rose. With Forty Pages of Designs in Colours by Walter Cranr. 6s. Queen Victoria, The Life and Times of. By Robert Wilson. Com- plete in Two Vols. With numerous Illustrations, gs. each. Quickening of Caliban, The. A Modern Story of Evolution. By J. CoMl'TON RiCKETT. 5S. Rabbit-Keeper, The Practical. By Cuniculus. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. Raffles Haw, The Doings of. By A. Conan Doyle. New Edition. 5s. Railways, Our. Their Development, Enterprise, Incident, and Romance. By John Pendleton. Illustrated. 2 Vols., demy 8vo, 24s. Railway Guides, Official Illustrated. With Illustrations, Maps, &c. Price IS. each ; or in cloth, as. each. Great Eastern Railway. Great Northern Railway. LoNnoN, Brighton and South Coast Railway. North-Western London and Railway. Rovings of a trated. 5s, Railway Library, Cassell's. Great Western Railway. London and South-Western Railway. Midland Railway. South-Eastern Railway. Restless Boy, The. By Katharine B. Foot. Illus- MKTZr.ROTT, SlIOKMAKER. By KATH ak.inh p. Woods. DAVIOTODD. By DAVID MACLURE TH.i Admirable Lady Biddy Fane. By Frank Barrett. Commodore Jlnk. ByG. Manvillr Ffnn. St. cuthbert's Tower. By Flor- ence Warden. The Man with a thumb. By Bar- clay North. By right not Law. By R. Shhkard. Within Sound of the Weir. By Thomas St. H. hake, UNiir.R A Strange Mask. By Franic Barrett. The cooMnsBERRow Mystery. By Iames Colwall. A (3i'i:!:r Race. By W. West all. Captain Trafalgar. By Westai.l aiifl Laurie. The phantom City. By W. Westall. Crown 8vo, boards, as, each. Errant, Barclay Jack Gordon, knight Gotham, 1883. 15» North. The Diamond Bi:tton. By Barclay North. Another's Crime. By Julian Haw- thorne. The yoke of the thorah. By SIDNHV LUSKA. Who IS John NOMAN! By Charles HENRY Beckett. The Tragedy of Brinkwater. By Martha l. Moodey. An American Penman. By Julian Hawthorne. SECI ion 658; or, THE FATAL LETTER. By Julian Hawthorne. The Brown Stone bov. By W. H. Bishop. a Tragic Mystery. By Julian Hawthorne. The Great bank Robbery. By JULIAN Hawthorne Rivers of Great Britain : Descriptive, Historical, Pictorial. The Royal River: The Thames, from Source to Sea. Popular Edition, i6s. Rivers ok the East Coast. With highly finished Engravings. Popular Edition, i6s. Rob'nson Crusoe, Cassell's New Fine-Art Edition of. With upwards of 100 Original Illustrations. 7s. 6d. Romance, The World of. Illustrated. Cloth, gs. Russo-Turkish War, Cassell's History of. With about 500 IIIus* trations. Two Vols. gs. each. Salisbury Parliament, A Diary of the. By H. W. Lucy. Illustrated by Harry Furniss. ais. Saturday Journal, Cassell's. Yearly Volume, cloth, 7s. 6d. Scarabscus. The .Story of an African Beetle. By the Marqiise Clara Lanza and Jambs Clarence Harvey. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. ::=-:1 « Selections from Cassell ^ Company i Publications. Science for All. Edited by Dr. Robert Brown. Revned Edition- Illustrated. Five Vols. gs. each. Shadow of a Song, The. A Novel. By Cecil Hari ey. 5s. Shaftesbury. The Seventh Earl of, K.G., The Life and Work of. By Edwin HonDKR. Clieap Edition. 3s. 6d. Shakespeare, The Plays of. Edited by Professor Henry Moklkv. Complete in Thirteen Vols., cloth, 2is. ; half-morocro, cloth sulc'^, 42s. Shakespeare, Cassell's Quarto Edition. Containing about r.oc) Illus- trations by H. C. Sei.oi'S. Complete in Three Vols., cloth gilt, £3 3s. Shakespeare, Miniature. Illustrated. In Twelve Vols., in bo.x, las. ; or in Red Paste Grain (box to match), with spring cat-h, 3is. Shakspere, The International. Edition de Luxe. " King Henry VIII." Illustrated by Sir Jamf.s Linton, P.R.T. (Price on amplication.') "Othello." Illustrated by Frank Dicksee, R.A. £3 103. " King Henry IV." Illustrated by Eduard Gkl' tznhr. £3 lOS. "As You Like It," Illustrated by Emile Bayard. £3 los. "Romeo and Juliet." Illustrated by F. Dicksee, K.A. Is now out of print, and scarce. Shakspere, The Leopold. With 400 Illustrations. Cheap Edition. 3s. 6d. Cloth gilt, gilt edges, 5s. ; Roxburgh, 7s. 6d. Shakspere, The Royal. With Steel Plates and Wood Engravings. Three Vols. 15s. each. Sketches, The Art of Making and Using, From the French of G. Fraipont. By Clara Bell. With so Illustrations, as. 6d. Smuggling Days and Smuggling Ways. By Commander the Hon. Henry N. Shore, R.N. With numerous Illustrations, 7s. 6d. Snare of the Fowler, The. By Mrs. Alexander. In One Vol., 6s. Social Welfare, Subjects of. By Rt. Hon. Lord Playfair, K C. B. 7s.6d. Social England. A Record of the Progress of the people in Religion, Laws, Learning, Arts, Science, Literature, and Manners, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day. By various writers. Edited by H. D. Traill, D.C.L, Vol. I.— From the Earliest Times to the Accession of Edward the First. 15s, Sports and Pastimes, Cassell's Complete Book of. Cheap Edition. With more than qoo Illustrations. Medium 8vo, 992 pages, cloth, 3s. 6d. Squire, The. By Mrs. Parr. In One Vol., 6s. Standard Library, Cassell's. Cloth, as. each. Shirley. Coningsby. Mary Barton. The Antiquary. Nicholas Nickleby (Two Vols.). Jane Eyre. Wuthering Heights. Dombey and Sou (Two Vols.). The Prairie. Night and Morning. Kenilworth. Ingoldsby Legends, Tower of London. The Pioneers. Charles O'Malley. Bamaby Rudge. Cakes and Ale. The King's Own. People I have Met. The Pathfinder. Evelina. Scott's Poems. Adventures of Mr. Ledbury. Ivanhoe. Oliver Twist. Selections from Hood's Works. Longfellow's Prose works. Sense and Sensibility. Lytton's Plays. Tales, Poems, and Sketches. Bret Harte. Martin Chuzzlewit (Two Vols.). The Prince of the House of David. Sheridan's Plays. Unele Tom's Cabin. Deerslayer. Home and the Early Christians. The Trials of Mar- garet Lyndsay. Harry Lorrequer. Eugene Aram. By Sir R. S. Ball, LL.D., &c. Jack Hinton. Poe's Works. Old Mortality, The Hour and the Man . Handy Andy. Scarlet Letter. Pickwick (Two \'()U.>. Last of the Mohieatia. Pride and Prejudice. Yellowplush Papers. Tales of the Borders. Last Days of i'almyra. Washington living's Sketoh-Boolt. The Talisman. Rienzi. Old Curiosity Shop, Heart of Midlothian. Last Days of Pompeii. American Humour. Sketches by Boz. Macaulay's Lays ard Essays. Last of the Barons, Star-Land. By Sir R. S. Ball, LL.D., &c. Illustrated. 6s. Storehouse of General Information, Cassell's. With Wood EngraT- ings, Maps, and Coloured Plates, la Vols., 58. each. Selections from Cassell ^ Company's Publications. On Stronijer Wings. By Edith LISIHR. You'll Love Me Yet. By Frances Uaswell; and That Little Wo- man. By Ida LF.MO>f. Hy EuwARU E. Hai.e. 6s. Eleven Possible Cases. By Various Authors. 6.S. Felicia. By Mi^.s FANNVMURFRHn. 58. Tlie Poet'a Audience, and Delilah. By Clara savii.h Ci.ARKK. 5h. Cheap Illustrated Editions. Cloth, The Black Arrow. Louis Stevf..\so.\. King Solomon's Mines. RiniiR HAr.(;ARD. Clot'i gilt, Two Vols. 21S By Robert Story of Francis Cludde, The. P.y Stani.f.y J. Wkyman. 6s. Story Poems. Fur YoiinR ami Old. Kdited by K. Davkni'ORT. 3s. 6d. Successful Life, The. By An Ki.dkr Brothek 3s. 6d. Sun, The. Hy Sir Robert Stawki.i. Hai.i., LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.A.S. Illustrated with Ki^ht Coloured Plates. 2is. Sunshine Series, Cassell's. Monthly Vcilunies. is. each. The Temptation of Dulce Car- rutherH. By C. E. C. \Vi kjali.. Lady Lorrl ner's Scheme and The Sorv of a Olamour. By Edith E. CUTHKLL. Womanlike. By Florence M. King. Sybil Knox: a Story of To-day. Thackeray, Character Sketches from. Six New and Original Draw. ings hy FREDr':RiCK Harnard, reproduced in Photogravure. 2is. Thackeray in America, With. By Eyre Crowe, A.R.A. Illustrated IDS. 6d. The " Short Story " Library. Ottothe Knight, &c. HyOciAVH Thani.t. 5b. Fourteen to One, &c. By Eliza- BF.TH STUART PHEr.l'S. 58. The "Treasure Island" Series. 3S. 6d. each. "Kidmpped." By R.L. Stevf:nson. Treasure Island. By Robert I.oui.s Sri:\i:vsoN. The Master of Ballantrae. By ROBF.RT LOriS Sri'.\'i:NSON. TinyLuttrell. By E. W. Hoi?NUK( Trees, Familiar. By G. S. Boui.cier, F.L.S. Two Series, full-page Coloured Plates by W. H. J. Boot. I2S. 6d. each. •« Unicode" : the Universal Telegraphic Phrase Book. Pocket Edition. 2s. 6d. United States, Cassell's History of the. By Edmuni^ Ou.ier. With 600 Illustrations. Three Vols. gs. each. Universal History, Cassell's Illustrated. Four Vols. gs. each. Wild Birds, Familiar. By W. Swaysland. Four Series. With Coloured Plates in each. I2s. 6d. each. Wild Flowers, Familiar. By F. E. Hulme, F.L.S., F.S.A. Five Series. With 40 Coloured Plates in each. 12s. 6d. each. Won at the Last Hole. A Golfing Romance. By M. A. Stobart. Illustrated, is. 6d. Wood, Rev. J. G., Life of the. By the Rev. Theodore Wood. hLxtra crown 8vo, cloth. Cheap Edition. 5s. Work. The Illustrated Journal for Mechanics. New and Enlarged Series. Vols. V. and VI., 4s. each. World of Wit and Humour, The. With 400 Illustrations. 7s. 6d. World of Wonders. Two Vols. With 400 Illustrations. 7s. 6d. each. Wrecker, The. By R. L. Stevenson and L. Osbourne. Illustrated. 6s. Vule Tide. Cas.seirs Christmas Annual, is. By H. With 40 Desk or 40 ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINES. The Quiver. Enlarged Series. Monthly, 6d. CaaselVa Faniih/ Magazine. Monthly, yd. "Little Folks*' Magazine. Monthly, 6a. The Magazine of Art. Monthly, is. *' Chums'* Illustrated Paper for Boys. Weekly, id. ; Monthly, 6d. CasselV.s Saturday Journal. Weekly, id. ; Monthly, 6d. Work. Weekly, id. ; Monthly, 6d. Cassi-i.t.'s Complete Catalogue, containing particuhirs of upwards o One Thousand Volumes, will be sent post free on application. CASSELL & COMPANY, Limited, Ludgate HUi, London, ^electioni from Casxell d: Company's Publications. \ Bible Biographies. Illustrated. 2s. 6d. each CA^fH^OR "'''" """^ •^°^^"^- "y '"« ^^^- PRRBHNnARY GORDON mlJ° 15°*"^ of Judges. By the Rev. J. WycLiFF GFDrR Tbe «tory of S;uU and rfamuol. L the Rev U C Tovey The StO-y of David. By the Rev. J. VVlLUF The Story of Josept.. ftsJ^esson^rT^. By Georgh SAINTON. «s-i-i^^ ^*°**y °*" J<^8us. Inverse. By I, R MAruiiPP nn Bible student in the B^iilf h Mus".'um fht "il'- .li' V, , ^ »-ome, ye Children. II iistrated Wv Kpv l'i-v,...,x, a\; Conquests of the Cross. lilustra ed InTvok •'„« Y^""'"- 5^. Dore Bible. Wuh .38 Illustrations by Ga s'tavf &r\.M ( y ^ sp^s.&.^-;s'^-^^^^^^^ Family Prayer-Book. The F.liUl i,„ li tree can, 153. ancl Rev. S. MAKxm. L\tra crown ^fn f.V*^^""" Garhett. M.A., cloth, red edges, One Shluingeach ^' ^"''"'"' ^'^'"^^- ^^"""'J *" MV Biru.i:. By the Ki^,rl,t Rev, \V. BOVD CAKl'IiNTIiK, liKhunof Rinon. M\ lAlHFR. Bythe kifjht Rev. ASH- •io\ OXENDKN, late Bishop of Mont- real. *'^„'^^"Rff POR. Con. By tlie Riyht Rev. Bishop COTTHRILL, MY ODJHCT IN Lll-H. By the Ven. An:hcle.icon FaRRAR, IXI). My ASPIRATIONS. By the Rev. G Matheson, D.I). ^^' ' ^'0'','"nai. Life. By the Rev. Prel). CHADWICK, D.D, "''■'BODY. By the Rev. I'rof. W. G CREATION. By Dr. H. Goodwin, the late I.ord Bishop of Carlisle. The Divinity of our Lord. By the Lord Bishop of Derry. THE Morality of the old Testa- Smyth. D.D,^ ""^ ^^^ N^-"'- MY GROWTH IN Divine Lifh. By the Rev. I'reb. Krvnolds, M.A. My Soui,. By the Rev. I'. B. POWER. My Hi.rfafti R. By the Venr Rev Dean Bickiikstkth. My Walk with God. By the Verv Rev. Dean MONTGOMERY ^ MY AIDS TO THE DIVINE LiFH. By the Very Rev. Deau BOYLE. My SOURCES OF Strength. Bv the Rev. t E.JENKINS. M.A.. Secretl y of U esleyan Missionary Society. "^'^ M^^JeT d'd'"''-, ^y ^'"'ir Connor . . Ynr^ •• ^^^ Archbishop of "°te'\'' ^^J'^ *!^^B'bl<^' The. BytheRev.C.GRiKiE DD LL D (Edm.). Two Vols., 34s. Illustrated Edition, One Vol., ais.' ' 5 B. 8.93 I' Selections from Camel I if Company's Publications. Lectures on Christianity and Socialism. By the Right Rev. Alffbd Barry, P. I). Cloth, 3s. 6d. Life of Christ, The. By the Vcn. .\rchdeacon Farrar, D.D., F.R.S. Library Kdition. 'J'wo Vols. Cloth, 24s. ; morocco, 42s. Chhap li.i.i'STRATKi) Edition*. Cloth, 7s. 6d. ; cloth, full ^\\i, Rilt edges, los. 6d. Popular Epition, in One Vol., 8vo, cloth, 6s. ; cloth, gilt edges, 7s. 6d. ; Persian morocco, gilt edges, ids. 6d. ; tree-c.ilf, 15s. Moses and Geologry ; or, The Harmony of the Bible with Science. By the Rev. Samuel Kinns, Ph.D., F.R.A.S. Illustrated. New Edition on Larger and Superior Paper. 8s. 6d. New Light on ths Bible and the Holy Land. By B. T. A. Evhtts, M.A. Illustrated. 2is. New Testament Commentary for English Readers, The. Edited by the I Rev. C. J. Ellicott, D.D., Lord Bishop of (lloucester and Brist , In Three Volumes. 2is. each. Vol.1. — The Four Gospels. Vol. IL— The Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Clalatians. Vol. III. — The remaining Books of the New Testament. New Testament Commentary. Edited by Bishop Ellicott. Handy Volume Edition. St. Matthew, 3s. 6d. St. Mark, 3s. St. Luke, 3s. 6d. St. John, 3s. 6d. The Acts of the Apostles, 3s. 6d. Romans, 2S. 6d. Corinthians I. and 1 1., 3s. Galatians, Ephesians, and Philip- pians, 3s. Colossians, Thessalonians, and Timothy, 3s. Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, and James, 3s. Peter, Jude, and John, 3s. The Revelation, 3s. An Introduction to the New Testament, 3s. 6d. Old Testament Commentary for English Readers, The. Edited by the Right Rev. C. J. Ellicott, D.D., Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. Complete in Five Vols. 2is.each. Vol. I.— Genesis to Num- bers. Vol. II. — Deuteronomy to Samuel II. Vol. III. — Kings I. to Esther. Vol. IV. — Job to Isaiah. Vol. V. — Jeremi.ih to Malachi. Old Testament Commentary. Edited by Bishop Ellicott. Handy Volume Edition. Genesis, 3s. 6d. Exodus, 3s. Leviticus, 3s. Numbers, 2s. 6d. Deuteronomy, 2S. 6d. Old and New Testaments, Plain Introductions to the Books of the. Containing ContriDutions by many Eminent Divines. In Two Volumes, 3s. 6d. each. Protestantism, The History of. By the Rev. J. A. Wylie, LL.D. Containing upwards of 600 Original Illustrations. Three Vols. gs. each. Quiver Yearly Volume, The. With about 600 Original Illustrations. 7s. 6d. Religion, The Dictionary of. By the Rev. W. Bknham, B.D. Cheap Edition, los. 6d. St. George for England ; and other Sermons preached to Children. By the Rev. T. Teionmouth Shore, M.A., Canon of Worcester. 5s. St. Paul, The Life and Work of. By the Ven. Archdeacon Farrar, D.D., F.R.S., Chaplain-in-Ordinary to the Queen. Library Editio.n. Two Vols., cloth, 24s. ; calf, 42s. Illustrated Edition, complete in One Volume, with about 300 Illustrations, ;^i is. ; morocco, £2 2s. Popular Edition. One Volume, 8vo, cloth, 6s. ; cloth, gilt edges, 7s. 6d. ; Persian morocco, los. 6d. ; tree-calf, 15s. Shall We Know One Another in Heaven? By the Rt. Rev J C. Ryle, D.D., Bishop of Liverpool. Cheap Edition. Paper cover-;, 6d. Signa Christi. By the Rev. James Aitchison. 5s. "Sunday," Its Origin, History, and Present Obligation. By the Ven. Archdeacon Hessey, D.C.L. Fi/th Edition. 7s. 6d. Twilight of Life, The. Words of Counsel and Comfort for the Aged. By the Rev. John Ellerton, M.A. is. 6d. Selections from Cassell f Company' i Publicatiom. (E&ttcationnl Morhs nntJ c^hibcnta' ;^anunls. Agricultural Text-Books, Cassell's, by John Wkigmtson, I'rotessor (The " Downton " Series.) Filited ol ARriculture. Ktilly Illustrated, I'kM". Wrightson. D.Sc. (London), F. boils and I.e., F.C.S. as. 6d. each. Farm Crops.— Hy Manures.— By J. M. H. Munro, Live Stock. — Hy Prof. Wrightson, Alphabet, Cassell's Pictorial. 3s. 6d. Arithmetics, The Modern School. By Gp.orgb Ricks, B.Sc. Lond. With Test Cards. (List on appluation.) Atlas, Cassell's Popular. Containing 24 Coloured M.ips. as. 6d. Book-Keeping. By i'liEonoRE Jonhs. For Schools, as. ; cloth, 38. For the Million, as. ; cloth, 3s. Books for Jones's System, as. British Kmpire Map of the World. New Map for Schools and Institutes. By G. R. Parkin and J. G. »i.\KTHoi.()MK\v, F.R G.S, Mounted on cloth, varnisheil, and with Rollers, ass. Broadacre Farm; or. Lessons in Our Laws. By H. F. Lest"r. Illustrated. Two Vols., is. 6d.e.ich. Chemistry, The Public School. By J. H. Anderson, M.A. as.6d. Cookery lor Schools. By Lizzie Heritage. 6d. Drawing Copies, Cassell's Modern School Freehand. First Grade, IS. ; Second Grade, as. Drawing Copies, Cassell's " New Standard." Complete in Fourteen Books, ad., 3d., and 4d. each. Energy and Motion. By William Paice, M.A. Iliu.strated. is. 6d. Euclid, Cassell's. Edited by Prof. Wallace, M.A. is. Euclid, The First Four Books of. New Edition. In paper, 6d. ; cloth, gd. Experimental Geometry. By Paul Bert. Illustrated, is. 6d. French, Cassell's Lessons in. New and Revised Kiiition. P.irts I. and II., each as. 6d. ; complete, 4s. 6d. Key, is. 6d. French-English and English-French Dictionary. Entirely New and Enlarged Edition. 1,150 pages, 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. French Reader, Cassell's Public School. By G. S. Conrad, as. 6d. GauOeamus. Songs tor Colleges and .Schools. Edited by Joh.\ Farmer. cs. Words only, paper covers, 6d. ; cloth, gd. German Dictionary, Cassell's New (German-English, English- Cierman). Cheap Edition. Cloth, 3s. 6d. Hand-and-Eye Training. By G. Ricks, B.Sc. 2 Vols., with 16 Coloured Plates in each Vol. Cr. 4to, 6s. each. Cards for Class Use, 5 sets, is. each. Historical Cartoons, Cassell's Coloured. Size 45 in. x 35 in., as. each. Mounted on canvas and varnished, with rollers, 5s. each. Historical Course for Schools, Cassell's. Illustrated throughout. I. — Stories from English History, is. II. — The Simple Outline of English Historj', is. 3d. III.— The Class History of England, as. 6d. Italian Grammar, The Elements of, with Exercises. In One Volume. 3s, 6d. Latin Dictionary, Cassell's New. (Latin-English and English- L.itin.) Revised by J. R. V. Marchant, M.A., and J. F. Charles, B.A. Cloth, 3s. 6d. Latin Primer, The First. By Prof. Postgate. is. Latin Primer, The New. By Prof. J. P. Postgatk. Crown 8vo, as. 6d. Latin Prose for Lower Forms. By M. A. Bavfield, M.A. as. 6d. Laundry Work (How to Teach It). By Mrs. E. Lord. 6d. Laws of Every-Day Life. By H. O. Arnold-Forster, M.P. is. 6d. Special Edition on Green Paper for Persons with Weak Eyesight, as. Little Folks' History of England. Illustrated, is. 6d. Making of the Home, The. By Mrs. Samuel A. Barnktt. is. 6d. Marlborough Books:— Arithmetic Examples, 3s. French Exercises, 3s. 6d. French Grammar, as. 6d. German do., 3s. 6d. Mechanics and Machine Design, Numerical Examples in Practical. By R. G. Blaine, M.E. New and Revised Edition. With 69 Diagrams. Cloth, as. 6d. SelecHom from Cassell ^ Company i Puhlications. Mechanics for Young Beginners, A First Book of. By the Rev. J. f!. K ASTON, M.A. 4S. 6d. Natural History Coloured Wall Sheets, Cassell's New. 18 Siihjects. Si/e 39 by ^i in. Mounted on rollers and varnislied, ss.earh. Object Lessons from Nature. Hy Prof. I,. C. MrAti., K. I-.S. Fully Illustrated. New and Enlarged Kdition. 'J'wo Vols., is. 6d. each ; or in One Vol., 3s. Physiology for Schools. By A. T. ScHOFiEi.n, M.D., M.R.C.S.,&c. Illustrated. Cloth, is. gd. ; Three Parts, paper covers, sd. each ; or cloth limp, 6d. each. Poetry Readers, Cassell's New. Illustrated. la Books, id. each; or complete in one Vol., cloth, is. 6d. Popular Educator, Cassell's NEW. With Revised Text, New Maps, New Coloured Plates, New Type, &c. In 8 Vols., 5s. each; or in Four Vols., h.-ilf-morocco, 50s. the set. Readers, Cassell's "Higher Class." (Liit on application.) Readers, Cassell's Readable. Illustrated. {List on application.) Readers for Infant Schools, Coloured. Three Books. 4d. each. Reader, The Citizen. By H. O. Aknoi.d-Forster, MP. Illustrated. is.6d. Also a Scottish Edition, cloth, is. 6d. Reader, The Temperance. By Rev. J. Dknnis Hird. is. 6d, Readers, The "Modern School" Geographical. {List on a/>/>lication.'\ Readers, The " Modern School." Illustrated. (J. ist on application.) Reckoning, Howard's Anglo-American Art of. By C. Frushkr HiiWAKP. Paper covers, is. ; cloth, as. Ne^v Rditiou, 5s. Round the Empire. By G. R. Parkin. Fully Illustrated, is. 6d. Science Applied to Work. By J. A. Bower, is. Science of^ Everyday Life. By J. A. Bower. Illustrated, is. Shade from Models, Common Objects, and Casts of Ornament, How to. By W. E. Sparkks. With 25 Plates by the Author. 3s. Shakspere's Plays for School Use. 5 Books. Illustrated. 6d. earh. Spelling, A Complete Manual of. By J. D. Moreli,, LI,.D. is. Technical Manuals, Cassell's. Illustrated throughout :— Handrailing and Staircasing, 3s. 6d. — Bricklayers, Drawing for, 3s.— Building Construction, 2S. — Cabinet-Makers, Drawing for, 3s. — Carpenters and Joiners. Drawing for, 3s. 6d. — Gothic Slonework, 3s. — Linear Drawing and Practical Geometry, as. — Linear Drawing and Projection. — The Two Vols, in One, 3s. 6d. — Machinists and Engineers, Drawing for, 4s. 6d. — Metal-Plate Workers, Drawing for, 3s. — Model Drawing, 3s. — Orthographical and Isometrical ProjectioUj as. — Practical Perspective, 3s.— Stonemasons, Drawing for, 3s. — Applied Mechanics, by Sir R. S. Ball, LL.D., as. — Systematic Drawing and Shading, as. Technical Educator, Cassell's New. An entirely New Cyclopaedia of Technical F.ducation, with Coloured Plates and Engravings. In Volumes, 5s. each. Technology, Manuals of. Edited by Prof. Ayrton, F.R.S., and Richard Wokmki.l, D.Sc, M.A. Illustrated throughout : — The Dyeing of Textile F'abrics, by Prof. Hummel, 5s.- Watch and Clock flaking, by D. Glasgow, Vice-President of the British Horo- Ingical Institute, 4s. 6d. — Steel and Iron, by Prof. W. H. Greenwood, F.C.S., M.I.C.E., &c., 5s.— Spinning Woollen .nnd Worsted, by W. &. r>. McLaren, M.P. ,4s. 6d.— Design in Textile Fabrics, by T. R. Ashen- liiirst, 4s. 6d.— Practical Mechanics, by Prof. Perry, M.E., 3s. 6d. — Cutting Tools Worked by Hand and Machine, by Prof. Smith, 3s. 6d. Things New and Old ; or. Stories from English History. By H. O. Arnoi.p-Forrter, M.P. Fully Illustrited, and strongly bound in Cloth. Standards 1. & II., od. each; Standard III., is.; Standard IV., is. 3d. ; Standards V., VI., & VII.. is. 6d. each. This World of Ours. By H. O. Arnold-Fgrster, M.P. lllusd 3s. 6d. StUciions from Castell # Company's Publications, Ipooha for ijoun^ {Jcoplc. "Little Folks" Half-Yearly Volume. Coiit;iiniii« 433 4I0 paycs, wiih about aoo llliistiiUions, and I'iciuios in Colour. Hoards, 3s. 6d. ; tloili, 5s. Bo- Peep. A Hook for the l.iltlcOnes. Willi Original Stories .ind Vt:r.sts. Illustrated throuylioiit. Yearly Volume. Hoards, 2s.6d. ; cloth, ,is. 6d. The Peep of Day. Casitl^'s IllHitratui Edition. 2s. 6d. Maggie Steele's Diary. Hy li. A. Ijili.wyn. as. 6d. A Sunday Story- Book. Hy Maiajih Hkowne, Sam Hkuwnh and Aunt FCthei,. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. A Bundle of Tales. Hy MA(.(iiR Hkowne (Author of "Wanted— a Kiiic," &c.), Sam Bkdwnk, and Aunt Ktiik.i.. 3s. 6d. Fairy Tales in other Lands. Hy Jii.ia CJoduaku. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. Pleasant Work for Busy Fingers. HyMAuoiE Hkowne. Illustrated. 5s. Born a King. Hy Fkances and Makv AKN(M.u-FoKsrKK. (The Life of Alfonso XIII., the Hoy Kinj; of Spain.) Illustrated, is. Cassell's Pictorial Scrap Book. Six Vols. 3s. 6d. each. Schoolroom and Home Theatricals. By Akiiiur Waloh. Illus- trated. 2S. fid. Magic at Home. By Prof. Hoffman. Illustrated. Cloth gilt, 5s. Little Mother Bunch. By Mrs. Moleswurth. Illustrated. Cloth, 3s. 6d. Pictures of School Life and Boyhood. Selected from the best Authors. Edited by Pekcv Fitzgekalu, M.A. 2s. 6d. Heroes of Every-day Life. By Lalka Lane. With about so Full- page IllustratloiLs. Cloth. 2S. 6d. Bob Lovell's Career. By Edwaku S. Ellis- 5s. Books for Young People. Cheap Edition. Illustrated. Cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. each. The Champion of Odin; or, Vikiug Ijifo in the Da.vs of Old. 13y J. Freil. Hudi^ells. Hound by a Spoil; or, The Hunted Witch of the Forest, liy tiie lion. Mrs. liruciie. Under Bayard'a Banner. By Henry Iritli. Books for Young People. Illustrated. 3s. 6d. each. •Bashful Fifteen. By I,. T. Meaile. *Tbe Wliite House at Iiich Qow. By Mrs. I'itt. •A Sweet Qirl Graduate. By L. T. Meaile. The King's Command: A Story lor O-irls. By Maygie i>ynuiij,'ton. LOBt in Sam.oa. A Tale of Adven- ture in the Navigator Islands. By Hdvtrard S. liUis, Tad ; or, " Getting Even " with Him. By lidward S. iiUis. •The Palaoo Beautiful. By L. T. Meade. *PoUy : A New-Faahioned Girl. By L. T. Meade, "Follow My Leader." Haines Keed. •The Coat of a Miatake. By Sarah I'itt. •a World of Girls : Tlie Story of a School. By L. T. Meade. lioat amoug White Africana. Uavid Ker. For Fortune and Gloi\y: AStory ol the Soudan War. By Lewis llouyh. * Also procurable in superior binding, 5s. ea^H, By Talhut By Crown 8vo Library. Clieap Editions. Gilt edges, 2s. 6d. each. Bambles Rovuid London. B/ C. I-. Mat^aux. Illustrated. Around and About Old England. By C. L, Malc.iux. Illustrated. Paws and ClawB. By one of the Authors of " Pocnis written for a Child." Illustrated. Decisive Eventa in History. By Thomas Arclier. With Original Illustrations. The True Bobinaon Crusoea. Cloth gilt. Peeps A broad for Folka at Homo, Uluatrated thruughoub Wild Adventures in Wild IMaces. »y Ur. Gurdou ijtabks, 1\.N. Illus- trated. Modern E.^ilorers. By Thomis iTo.t. II' .raied. ^fcw and Ciieaper haUion. Early Explorers. By Thomas I'rost. Home Chat witli our Young Foik.a. Illustrated throuL'huuL Jungle, Peals, and Plain, lUustratcd throughout. The England of .Shakespearo. r.y E. i:ioadby. With FiUftMUfo lllui- tratiwia. ^ Selections Jrom Cassell ^ Company's Publications. The "Cross and Crown" Series. Illustrated, as. 6d. each. Frefdom'B Sword : A Slory of tlie iJays (li Wallace and Bruce. liy Annie S. Swan. StroriK to Suflbr: A Story of tho JowB. liy v.. Wynne. IIorooB o! tho Indian Empire: or, StorioB of Valour and Victory. Hy I- rncst I-oster. In LottorB of ii'iamo : A Story of the WoldoiiHoa. lly C. I.. Mutdaux. Through Trial to Triumph. By MadeUui! li. Hunt. By Fire and Sword: A Story of tho Huffuenota. By Thomas Arclier. Adam Hepburn'B Vow: A Talc of Kirk and Covenant. By Annie S. Swan. No. XIII.; or, Tho Story of tho IiOBt Vestal. A Talc of l-..irly Christian Days. By Hnuna Marsliall. "Golden Mottoes" Series, The. Kiicli Rook containinj; 2o8pa;;es, witli Four full-page Original Uluslraticjiis. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 2s. each. tlie "Nil DoBOorandum." By Kev. I'. I.anKbrid){e, M.A. "Boar and Forbear." liy Sarali I'itt. "ForoinoBt U I Can." By Helen Atltridne. Cassell's Picture Story Books. i'iclures and .Stories, &c. 6d. Llltlo Talks. Bright Staru. Nursery Toya. Pet's PoBv. Tiny Tales DalHy'B Stor.y Book. Dot's Story Book. A N -Bt of StorieH. Oood-Nlght HtorioB. Chata for Small Chatterers. I " Honour is my Gt lido." liy Jeanie ! Meruit (Mrs. Adams-Acton). I "Aim at a Sure End." Uy Iniily Searchficld. " Ho ConquerB who Endures." I»^ the Author ut "May Cunniiit^liam s Trial," &(.. Each containing about Sixty Pages of each. Auntle'a BtoriOH. Birdie's Story Book. Little Chimes. A Shnaf of Tales. Dowdrop Stories. Cabsell's '.penny Story Books. All Illustrated, and containing Interesting Stories by well-known writers. The SmuKBlor'a Cave. Little Lizzie. Little Bird. Life and Adven turc'B of. Luke Barnicott. The Delft Jug The Boat Club. Little Pioklea. The BlcUester CoUeffO Boya. My First Cruise. The Little Feaoemaker. Cassell's Shilling Story Books, ing Stories. Bunty and the Boya. The 'loir of ElmOale. Tho Mystery at BbonclUr School. Claimed at Last, and Boy'a Koward. Thorns and Tantcloa. The Cuckoo in the Kobln'a Neat. John's Mistake. The History of Five Little Pitchers. Diamonds iu tho Sand. Illustrated Books for the Little Ones. All Illustrated. )s. each ; doth g-.: ThIcb Told for Sunday. Sunday Stones for Small People. Stories and Pictures for Bun- day. Bible Pictures for Boys and OJrlH. PlreliKht Stori'^H. BiinliRnt nnd Shade. nub-a Dub Tales. Fine Feathers and Fluffy Fur. tlcr.j;f VTM WUd. Selections from Cassell % Compan/s Publications, By "Wanted— a King " Scries. Cheap Edition. Illustrated, as. 6d. each, Oreat Qrandmamma. Hy Gcort^ina M. Synge. Robin's Bide. By Lllinur Davenport Adanis. Wanted-aKinu: or, How Morle sot the Nurspry Rhymes to Rights. Uy M.igtiie Hruwiie. With Original Designs Ijy Harry Fu nlss. The World's Workers. A Scries of New and Original Volumes. With Portraits printed on a tint as Frontispiece, is. each. John Casaell. By (;. Holdcn Pike. Charles Haddon Bpurgeou. Uy Ci. HOI.DHN I'IKH. Dr. Arnold of Rugby. By Rose H. .S<-lfe. The Earl of BhafVeBbury. By Henry l-ritli. Sarah RobinNon, AgnoH Wes- ton, and Mrs. Meredith. Uy v.. M. Tonikinson. Thomas A. Edison and Samuel P. B. Morse. Uy Dr. Deiislow and J. Marsh Parker. Mrs. Somcrvillo and Mary Car- penter. Uy I'hyllis Urowne. General Gordon. Uy the Re». .S. A. Sw.'ihie. Charles Uiekena. By his Eldest I)aui;htcr. Sir Titus Salt and George Moore. U> ' liuraley. Florence Nightingale, (-'atherine Marsh, Frances Ridley Haver- gal, Mrs. Ranyard ("L. N. R."). By Lizzie AllUridL'e. Ur. Guthrie, Father l»:»thew, Elihu Burritt, George Livesey. Uy Juhii W. Kirton, LL.1J. Sir Henry Haveloolt and Colin Campbell Lord Clyde. Uy li. C. I'liillips. Abraham Lincoln. Uy iirnest l-oster. QeorKC MUllur and Andrew Reed. Hy M. R. Pitman. Richard Cubden. Uy R. Ciowin^. Benjamin Franklin. Uy V.. M. Touikinson. Handel. Uy Eliza (.'larke rSwaine. Tiumer the Artist. Hy the Rev. .S. A. George and Robert Stepheusoo. Uy C. K. Malfaux. David Livingstone. Uy Rul>ert .Smiles •»• J he above lVurks{excliuiiiii.' RiCHAKU COHDKN am/ CHAR1.HS IlAUUON SPUKGI'.ON) iatt also I't had Three in One Vol., clolh, gilt edjiti, :ji. Library of Wonders. Illustrated Gift-books for Boys. Paper, is.; cloth, IS. 6d. Wonderful Adventures. I Wonders of Bodily Strengtb Wonderful EscapoB. | and Skill. Cassell's Eighteenpenny Story Books. Illustrated. Wee WilUe Winkie. Ups and Downs of a Donkey's Life. Three Wee Ulster Lassies. Up the Ladder. Dick's Hero; one. other Stories. and the The Chip Boy, Ragglos, Baggies, Emperor. Roses from Thorns. Oif\ Books for Young People Original Illustrations in each. The Bo.v Hunters of Kentucky. Uy 1 ulwurd b. Llhs. Red Feather: a Tale of American Frontier. Edward S. ElUs. Peeking a City. Rboda's Reward; or, Wishes were Horses.'' Jack Marston's Anchor. Frank's Life-Battle ; or, Throe Friends. Fritters. Hy .Sarah I'itt. The Two Hardcastles. UyMade line Honuvia Hunt the By If The Cassell's Two-Shilling Story Books. Illustrated. Faith's Father. By Land aud Sea. The Young Berringtons. Jeff and Loff. Tom Morris's Error. Wortli more than Gold. "Through Flood-Through Fire;" and other Stories. The Girl with the Golden Looks. Stories of the Olden Time. Uy Popular Authors. Cloth gilt, IS. 6d. each. Major Monk's Motto. 1-. Lan|{l>riil^'c. Trixy. Uy MaL'j,'ie Symington. Rags and Rainbows: A Story of Thanksgiving. Uncle WiUTam'p '.'horges; or, The Broken Tru^ Pretty Pink's Purpose; or. The Little Street Merchants. Tim Thomson's Trial. Hy Cieortc Weathcrly. Ursula's Stumbling-lilock. Hy Julia (;i)d uid other Tal c. The Four Cats of the Tippertoos, Marion's Two Homes. Littlo Folks' Sunday BoolL. Two Fourpeuny Bits. Poor Nolly. Tom Uoriot. Through Peril to Fortune. Aunt Tabitha's Waifs. In Miuohiet Again. !| ; Selections from Cassell ^ Company's Publications. Cheap Editions of Popular Volumes for Young People, cloth, gilt ci1k»-"!*> 23. 6d. each. iiound in la QuoBt of Oold; or, Under the WhanKft i'allH. On Board tlio l:\m- llliiblraUons, Tho Clut-Chat Album. and Play. ConlainiiiL' .Stones hy I'miular Authors. lUustrateil. Own Album of AniiualH. With t'ull'page Illiutraiioiis. With lUusir.acd tbiiiui^hout. CMiseU & Company's Complote Catalogue wUi Lt uni pou fr€€ on appiiiatioH to CASSELL & COMPANY. Limitbu. LM. 6d. each. e MouQtouia. With Four full- each. i Wigwam. LIS. Ulubtrated. Uda. With Four Full- 3s. 6d. each. f. A Tale u< IndUa II KcatU(.ky. as. 6d. each. iderland (Japan). 1 America. pies (India). t (Qeorge Waah* in the Battle of *. lit, LaiuleU. 13 Coloured llalet i. iH. an Book. With liriistr.iliijiis. I'.ipcT .lotli, K''' *-''Ik<--s, Ob. .les. Willi ( "i-j>;iMiU DUida, iH.; Llutli, All Sorts. With ioiis. bum. JUu-.ir.tlcd /