s* 
 
 } 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Tcrr> 
 
 JN W- 
 
 IN 
 
 NORWICH AND NEW LONDON, 
 
 AS PROVED BY 
 
 THE OFFICIAL RECORDS. 
 
 DELIVERED I \ NORWICH AND NEW LONDON, 
 
 BY REV. L. T. CH A M! B E It L A I IV , 
 
 Pastor of Broadway Cbnrch, N<u-\\i<-h.
 
 PRINTED FOR DISTRIBUTION IN THE TWO CITIES. 
 ORDERS FILLED AT THE COST RATE OF $7.00 PER THOUSAND. 
 
 ADDRESS REV. L. T. CHAMBERLAIN, NORWICH, CT.
 
 UCSB LIBRARY 
 
 Mu. PRESIDENT AND 
 F-ENS: Five months ago, the citizens 
 of Norwich and New London met to 
 consider the effects of No-License. We 
 all felt that sufficient time had elapsed 
 for the arrival at decisive conclusions. 
 Wo recognized the truth that the cause 
 was to find its practical defeat or tri- 
 umph in the observation and recorVl of 
 results. It was then said from this plat- 
 form. "If the facts arc against us, we 
 wish to know it. If they are for us, we 
 wish our opponents to join us in ac- 
 knowledgment thereof. For, by the re- 
 sults, we stand or fall. To be con- 
 demned in the matter of results, is to be 
 assigned not only >o present obloquy, 
 but also to future defeat." It was pro- 
 claimed, moreover, that nothing would 
 suffice, save the proved realities and the 
 authentic record; tint ihe only honest, 
 as the only wise course, was to search 
 the case to its actual events. 
 
 You will join me to-night, fcllow- 
 citi/en-s, 1 am sure, in the reiteration ot 
 those fearless words. Neither you, nor 
 I, nor any well wisher of Temperance, 
 
 will ask for evasion or concealment. 
 We have no purpose to shut our eyes to 
 the thing that is veritable. Show us the 
 evidence, and we will admit the infer- 
 ence to which the evidence points. AV'e 
 welcome the truth, the whole truth, and 
 nothing but the truth. 
 As Chaucer says: 
 
 "Truth is the highest thing that man may 
 keep." 
 
 And weadmit, with equal unreserve, 
 that the conclusions t:> which the results 
 point us to-night, will justly be even 
 more decisive than those of rive months 
 ago. The period of trial has been 
 extended to double the former limit. It 
 now verges upon a year since, in these 
 two cities, the decree against the sale of 
 intoxicating liquors as a beverage, was 
 passed by popular vote. If, therefore, 
 the former period reviewed gave signifi- 
 cant results, the period now in be sur 
 veyed will be doubly suggestive. Ex- 
 perience is more than mere theory. For 
 one, I fully recognize that fact. For 
 one, I have pledged myself to abide that, 
 test rightfully applied Show me that
 
 fair experiment reveals the unadvisable- 
 nessof No-License, and I will cease its 
 advocacy, from this hour forth. God 
 forbid that any of us should seek the 
 maintenance of what is proved to be 
 worthless. 
 
 I would only desire, that those op- 
 posed tons >hould unite in the same 
 confession of purpose. It would be 
 enough, if they too would sincere- 
 ly pledge themselves to be ruled by the 
 authenticated demands of the public 
 welfare. If only that fair premise might 
 be agreed upon, conflict would soon 
 give place to accord. For the results are 
 overwhelming in their conclusiveness 
 They are so plain that he may run who 
 reads. They are so manifold that even 
 the foolish need not err with regard 
 thereto! 
 
 And yet, before I name the results, 
 let me point out certain considerations 
 which should be borne in mind. Con- 
 siderations pertinent not only to this 
 discussion, but essentially to all ques- 
 tions of the public well-being. It is of 
 exceeding importance that we rise 
 to the ground that is both fair and fun- 
 damental. 
 
 In the first place, then, it is not war- 
 rantable to rest the decision of such 
 i-^ues, upon the mere record as figured 
 and tabulated. That record is itself to 
 be viewed in the light of the principles 
 to which it stands related. A moment 
 ago, I pledged myself to abide the test of 
 fair experiment. Observe, fair experi- 
 ment. 1 announced my abandonment of 
 what ever was proved worthless. Ob- 
 serve, the worthlessness was to be proved. 
 I now add, accordingly, that the fairness 
 of an experiment includes something 
 more than that an experiment has been 
 made; and that the proof of worthlcss- 
 nes< must go beyond the mere citation 
 of figures. 
 
 For example. Suppose that in our 
 
 midst, the crime of highway robberv 
 should become prevalent and systemat- 
 ic. Suppose it should gain the power 
 which comes from wealth and numbers. 
 Suppose, too, that the citizens, in self- 
 defense, should pass a special law 
 against it; should characterize it as it 
 deserved, and should essay to rid them- 
 selves of its curse. Suppose, however, 
 that the highwaymen, in (heir criminal- 
 it}', and in their determination to show 
 the law to be futile, should multiply 
 their robberies, and should add the ter- 
 rors of murder, as well; that, fora brief 
 period, they should prevail by a violence 
 which was like that of armed invasion 
 and rapine! Would that be a fair ex- 
 periment? Would the law have been 
 shown to be valueless? 
 
 You answer, at once, and with all the 
 conscience and c immon-sense you pos- 
 sess, "No! The law was simply inade- 
 quate. Its enforcement was insufficient. 
 It lacked sustaining power." And in 
 the same breath with which you named 
 the deficiency, you would name the 
 remedy. You would say, "L'-( the au- 
 thorities redouble their efforts. Let 
 them arm themselves with their own 
 utmost prerogatives And if even that 
 be insufficient, let them summon the 
 people to their aid, until there be not 
 another hand which can be lifted for 
 the common defense." You would look 
 past the present increase of woe, to see 
 that the relief was to be sought in the 
 one direction of increased support of the 
 law. Yon would aver that there was 
 no option; that to gain respite by the 
 compassion of oul -laws, would be fatal 
 disgrace, and that to be overpowered by 
 them, would be the end of all free, right- 
 eous government. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, that illustration is 
 applicable in more relations than one. 
 ll not only shows that statistical results, 
 the observed outward aspects, are to \n>
 
 viewed in thc-ir relations, as well as 
 in themselves; it also shows that there 
 may be considerations which transcend 
 the so-called practical results, and hold 
 sway even in apparent spite of them. 
 You could'nt do otherwise than oppose 
 the highwaymen, whether you succeed- 
 ed or not! 
 
 Well, as the case stands with refer- 
 ence to license, it is not far otherwise. 
 On the one hand, and I pray that the 
 alternatives may be remembered on the 
 one hand, you have to deal, not with 
 an ideal system of license, in which the 
 public welfare should be the end, and 
 in which that end should be secured by 
 routining the sale of liquors as a 
 beverage, to a few, responsible, consid- 
 erate persons: but you have to deal with 
 a license which means, practically, the 
 engaging in the traffic of all who choose, 
 and who can pay the license fee. That 
 is what license means historically. 
 That is what it has meant in Norwich 
 and New London, in all the, years of its 
 prevalence. As I chance to know, the 
 citi/.eti of Norwich who was most con- 
 cerned in the passage of the Act by the 
 Legislature, earnestly endeavored to se- 
 cure the ideal application of it to his 
 municipality. He counseled the Select- 
 men to put the permissive license in the 
 hands of the trustworthy few. He en- 
 treated them. But the inherent import 
 of the law itself, and the fierce pressure 
 from without, broke down the imprac- 
 ticable theory. Permissions were grant- 
 ed to the larger number, and that prec- 
 edent lias ruled ever since. 
 
 This, then, is the issue. By favoring 
 license, you favor the dram-shop, and to 
 whatever extent the profit thereof will 
 warrant. The restrictions which the 
 license lawVssays to put about the I raffle, 
 are found to be dillicult of enforcement, 
 and, so far as any fealty of the dram- 
 
 shop itself is coacerned, are no more 
 than a deceiving mockery. 
 
 Therefore, I submit, it were hardly 
 worth one's while to indulge the fancy 
 that in voting for license, he is voting 
 for something which cannot fairly be 
 likened to highway robbery and mur- 
 der. License in Connecticut, is the 
 dram-shop at every corner; and the' 
 dram-shop u worse than the high way 1 
 robbery or the highway nitirder! Ah, 
 ladies and gentlemen, you have but to 
 look anew and for one moment, to real- 
 ize that I am not speaking unadvisedly: 
 As against the mere robbery which it 
 were within the highwayman's power 
 to inflict, put the desolations which you 
 know to be wrought by the drun-shop 
 traffic; the indolence, the waste, the 
 want, the unkindness, the brutality, the 
 licentiousness, the defiance of all social, 
 and legal, and divine restraints. Put 
 in that contrast, the hunger and naked- 
 ness of children; the tears and anguish 
 of wives and mothers; the shame, and 
 remorse, and blasphemy of the stricken 
 fathers and sons. What is robbery com- 
 pared with the thing which works such 
 work as that? Wrong done to the 
 dram-shop by the comparison ; No ! 
 One should rather beg pardon of the 
 highwayman for bringing his compara- 
 tively harmless plundering, into a com- 
 panionship so incomparably foul ! And 
 as against the highway murder, you 
 have but to put the second death, the 
 loss of the soul itself, in that eternal 
 world toward which we all are hasten- 
 ing! 
 
 Let us not cajole ourselves into think- 
 ing that our alternative is between any- 
 thing other, or less momentous, than 1 
 No-License on the one side, and the le- 
 galized, destroying dram-shop mi the 
 other. Let us not conjure up some 
 baseless thing, and suppose that that is
 
 whal stands a- Hie. possible nnd harm 
 !(>-. alternate. 
 
 1 have said that, on the one hand, ii- 
 reuse means I he'di ani-sliop with all its 
 horrors. 1 pray yon to note, on the 
 other hand, u consideration which re- 
 veals, and in which consists, an added 
 baseness on the pail of that same li- 
 cense. The consideration is this, that 
 those who, under^ license, keep the 
 dram-shops, and who work such woe, 
 arejlhosc who habitually trample on the 
 very law whose protection they invoke, 
 and who, even thus, belie all their 
 asserted regard for the public will. Did 
 those'engaged in the dram-shop traffic 
 say|openlyjthat their advocacy of license 
 was for purely selfish ends; and that 
 when they had secured the law, th?y 
 intended to violate it to every practica- 
 ble extent, that so they might further 
 gratify their greed; that would some 
 what mitigate their sin. That would 
 at least relieve them of hypocrisy, con- 
 cerning which Montaigne once said, "I 
 mortally hate it ; and of all vices, find 
 none that does evidence so much base- 
 ness and meanness of spirit ." 
 
 As it is al present, they discuss meth- 
 ods with us. They talk of the common 
 welfare. They claim to be within the 
 pale of good faith, and to be deserving 
 of a place in the body politic. They 
 profess to regard it as an injustice,when 
 they are ranked with desperadoes and 
 villains! 
 
 Yet look again at the facts. The sup- 
 porters of the dram-shop not only 
 break the law under cover of which they 
 have an authorized existence, but they 
 appear as lull citizens, and enter into the 
 covenant which is involved in the fran- 
 chise! They move in society, and take 
 the sacred ballot as their means of vic- 
 tory. The}' not only persistently evade 
 and defy all -the restrictive provisions 
 of license, and lift nohand against those 
 
 ! who secretly do 'business in intoxicating 
 liquors without so much as the form of 
 license, they also claim the highest pre- 
 rogative within the social, political com- 
 pact. They lay their unclean hands on 
 the very ark of our hope, and turn it into 
 an engine of sin and death. They come 
 up from the depths of their desperate 
 trallic. and arm themselves wi'h the 
 armor of light. They thus make war 
 upon the safety and practical value of 
 popular government itself. Their'* is 
 treason against the fundamental right of 
 every man who casts his ballot in good 
 faith. Their hypocrisy and treachery 
 lend the greater infamy to their destruct- 
 ive course. 
 
 Good friends, when you take those 
 considerations into account, a re you not 
 compelled to say of license, even as of 
 highway rapine and murder, that you 
 must oppose it, whether you succeed or 
 not? Is it not, practically, one of those 
 supreme offences which must be antag- 
 onized? Is there, in reason, any option 
 for us? Does not the issue transcend 
 a'l mention of the statistical results se- 
 cured by No-License, and demand of us 
 an absolute, unchangeable oppositon to 
 license? 
 
 I have listened, indeed, to the talk 
 about its being no sin perxc to drink and 
 sell, under certain circumstances and 
 due cautions, the intoxicating beverages. 
 I have heard it affirmed that the "high 
 moral argument" is sometimes inapplic- 
 able, and that the case is to be wholly de- 
 cided in the forum of experiment. They 
 have zealously assured us that a direct 
 comnarison of results, is the only 
 proper direction in which to turn our 
 thoughts. But such statements are as 
 as wide of the real, urgent question be- 
 fore this municipality, as would be re- 
 finements of logic and analysis, with 
 reirard to the possible right of the per- 
 ishing to save themselves by taking what
 
 was not their own, or (lie right of the 
 assaulted to' take llie life oi' a deadly as- 
 sailant, when the actual issue \\ as re- 
 specting highway robbery and n.imler! 
 License in Norwich, in New London, in 
 Connecticut, means the dram-shop in its 
 usual character, and against that we are 
 mornll}', religiously bound to contend 
 utterly, unless we have ceased to fear 
 God or to regard man. Though the is- 
 sue had been originally one of practical 
 results alone, yet has time shown that 
 the results of license, of the dram-.shops, 
 are always so shameful, so deadly, that 
 the issue becomes, at last, an issue of 
 absolute morality and absolute right. 
 From that point-on, there is essentially 
 no rightful choice. In reality, you do 
 not need to compare results. You 
 know, in advance,, that the true path 
 is the path of the opposition! 
 
 And now r I point out to you still 
 another consideration which properly 
 precedes the enumeration of specific re- 
 sults. It is involved in what I have al- 
 ready said, yet it deserves this further 
 notice. You hear of a comparison of t he 
 workings of license and No-License. 
 And one who did not know the condi- 
 dition of t'jings, might suppose that the 
 two methods were subjected to the same 
 equitable test. He might infer thai 
 when the one course or the other was 
 adopted by the choice of the people, at 
 the ballot-box, it was permitted to have 
 its essentially unhindered application. 
 Would not a "comparison of results" 
 imply that? Ought not that to be the 
 fact? 
 
 But what is the actual condition of 
 things, in this municipality and in this 
 State? Is it that of a fair, equitable 
 test? Oh no! The condition is this. 
 Whenever license is to be adopted or 
 rejected at the polls, its opponents op- 
 pose it by only legitimate means. They 
 invariably honor the sacredness ol the 
 
 franchise ;md the obligations of good 
 faith. And even when the law of license 
 has been- adopted agair.st their honest 
 effort, they still labor earnestly to make 
 its practical success as great as possible. 
 They endeavor to enforce its provisions. 
 They seek to maintain its safeguards. 
 They are active; in the attempt to pre- 
 vent the lawless from bringing it into 
 discredit by its violation. They try, 
 under it. to restrain drunkenness and to 
 hinder crime. I appeal to-night and in 
 tl. is presence, for the corroboration of 
 my words. Has not that been 1 lie case, 
 fellow-citi/ens, from the hour that Lo- 
 cal Option became the policy of the 
 IState? Has not that been the course of 
 the most earnest No-License men, in all 
 the years of the conflict? Is not that 
 the action to which they feel bound by 
 their own fealty to God mid man? 
 
 And yet, what is the fact respecting 
 the reverse case? How is it, when No- 
 License is likely to win at the polls? 
 And how is it, when it has fairly gained 
 the victory there? You know, to 
 your sorrow. You know that in such 
 an emergency at the polls, the rum-inter- 
 est, the distinctively license-interest, 
 stops at no unfairness of method. Its 
 champions make intoxication itself, and 
 bribery, and falsehood, and virtual in- 
 timidation, the weapons of their war- 
 fare. I am not slandering them. I am 
 not talking at random. I am simply 
 stating what, a year ago, and at elections 
 preceding, was seen to be. was known 
 to be, the fact; what was done in Nor- 
 wich and New London, and in the coun- 
 try towns, under the flag, and in the 
 light of day! 
 
 Yes, and since the election of Octo- 
 ber, 1878, which was carried for No-Li- 
 cense, in spite of such opposition, what 
 has been the attitude of the friends of 
 the rum-traffic? Have they endeavored 
 to make No-License a success? Have
 
 they reciprocated the former action of 
 Temperance men, and aimed to give ef- 
 ficiency to the statute which was fairly 
 secured at the polls? Have they even 
 been neutral, and permitted the unhind- 
 ered movement of that to which they 
 were, at least, bound to submit? You 
 know the answer. It seems almost pre- 
 posterous to ask the questions. You 
 know that from that day to this.the rum- 
 interest of Norwich and New London, 
 with no known exception, has set itself 
 against the execution of the No-License 
 law. Though, as voting citizens, they 
 virtually covenanted to obey it, in case 
 it was adopted, they have sought to 
 trample it under their feet. By day and 
 by night; through the week of labor and 
 the Sunday of rest: by stealth and fraud; 
 by boldness and bravado; by their press 
 and their lawyers: by their money and 
 their influence; they have attempted the 
 defeat of No-License, in its practical 
 working. They have even boasted of 
 their faithlessness and crime; for they 
 have whispered it in the ear, and shout- 
 ed it on the house-tops, that the sales of 
 spirituous liquors as a beverage, have- 
 not been much diminished under No- 
 License. As if they were oblivious to 
 all considerations of honor, they have 
 unceasingly, mercilessly, fought against 
 the success of the measure whose un- 
 hindered application, in case it was car- 
 ried, was itnpliedly guarantied by them 
 at the ballot-box. 
 
 And under such circumstances.we art* 
 told, with coolness, that it is not for us 
 to claim for No-License, any worth 
 which is not substantiated bv the com- 
 parative statistics! When the friends 
 of No-License, the most earnest workers 
 for Temperance, have wrought whole- 
 heartedly for the public sobriety and 
 well-being, under license; ;md have de- 
 fend, -d the public welfare, under Ni> 
 License against the unrelenting, un- 
 
 scrupulous attacks of that interest which 
 is never regardful of law: they are re- 
 minded that they deserve to stand or 
 fall, and their law to be retained or re- 
 jected, according to the mere sums-total 
 which they may be able to show as their 
 net gain! What an essential unfairness! 
 Aye, how profound, how fearful, the 
 underlying evil which, in the anguish 
 of our protest, we thus point out! 
 
 As I have said before, and as I reiter- 
 ate to-night, the case so stands in these 
 communities, that the plea to be made 
 is not simply in behalf of Temperance, 
 and of No-License as promoting Tem- 
 perance. It is also, and even more fun- 
 damentally, in behalf of law as law, and 
 of the lawfully, solemnly expressed will 
 of the people as something more than a 
 farce. Why is it, 1 wonder, that these 
 prevailingly Christian, law-honoring 
 communities tolerate, in respect to 
 Temperance laws, a persistent lawless- 
 ness which, in any other matter, would 
 be deemed unendurable? 
 
 Suppose that there was a division of 
 preference in this city, as to the relatio* 
 of law to public education. Suppose 
 that the greed of many, their unwilling- 
 ness to be taxed for the support of the 
 public schools, should lead them to op- 
 pose the whole plan; should lead them 
 to pronounce in favor of leaving each 
 parent to educate his own children, or 
 not, as he pleased. And suppose that 
 in due time, and in due manner, the 
 public will expressed itself at the polls, 
 in favor of general taxation for schools, 
 and compulsory attendance. Suppose, 
 however, that thereafter the opponents 
 of the plan thus adopted, should indi- 
 vidually, and by combination, attempt 
 to thwart it. Should secrete their own 
 children, and tempt others into truancy; 
 should plan evasions and resort, to false- 
 hood; -hould virtually resist the law, 
 and boast that (hey had piv.r-uted its
 
 proposed working. Would you lose 
 faith in the excellence ol' ( thc law itself? 
 Would you, indeed, quietly admit that 
 it was only a question of education, to 
 be decided by comparative results in 
 this given community? No, no, fellow- 
 citizens! You would say, "The issue 
 transcends even that It has become the 
 question of respect for law fairly enact- 
 ed. It is the question of the existence 
 of society and real government." And 
 then you would say, further, "We pro- 
 pose to have that greater question set- 
 tled, and settled first." You would 
 swear by the sacredness of decency and 
 right that, in some way, the lawlessness 
 should be made to cease. By an aroused : 
 public opinion; by a re-enforcement of 
 both the statute and its execution; you 
 would oblige the defiance of the law, in 
 the main at least, to come to an end. 
 You would declare that that was the 
 condition precedent, on which alone any 
 fair test of educational measures could 
 be made. 
 
 Well, then, say the same, I pray you, 
 with reference to this issue of Temper- 
 ance legislation. Say that when a law 
 is adopted by the people themselves, 
 after full discussion, and in the pre- 
 scribed way, it shall be prevalently ex- 
 ecuted; even though it require every 
 third man to be enrolled as police, or 
 the calling out of the whole body of 
 citizens.at summons of the Mayor. Say 
 that when that end has been secured, you 
 shall have your first opportunity for a 
 fair trial of the merits of No-License. 
 
 Friends, the supporters of No-License 
 are law-abiding people. Whether they 
 win or lo.ie at the polls, they work for 
 the observance of statutes and the secur- 
 ing of the public good. Contrariwise, 
 the most active: supporters of license are 
 prevailingly law-breakers, especially 
 when the will of the people is against 
 their dram-shops. Let then, 'the con 
 
 testants themselves, as well .as th$ 
 cific result*,, -by judged >iu ; that, lighU; 
 Tak your, own stand nccoidingly. .),?.- 
 
 And th';re is yet another reflection 
 wnich should bo borne in mind, as we 
 approach the recorded results. I.t is 
 this, and this emphasized by what has 
 gone before, viz: that the single year, 
 or more exactly ten months, which has 
 elapsed since the passage of No-License, 
 is not sufficient time for a proper percep- 
 lion of what No-'jicense will do. Li- 
 cense has held the field during a vastly 
 longer period. It has had its extended 
 trial. Those who voted against it, have 
 given its provisions their adhesion and 
 support. Fellow-citizens, let No-License 
 have similar trial, for there are reasons 
 manifold, why its results may be expect- 
 ed to become even more satisfactory, as 
 the years go by. Look, for instance, at 
 this one fact. Last year, No License 
 was carried in the cities, by a majority 
 so slight as to lead the drain-shops to 
 suppose that they might reverse the de- 
 cision, at the next election. Conse- 
 quently, the utmost practicable amount 
 of money has been retained in the 
 business. The utmost risks have been 
 taken, in the effort to live on until the 
 day of release. With the determina- 
 tion which naturally belongs to one 
 who deems himself to have suffered 
 only a passing defeat, the rum-seller has 
 pursued his course. The whole rum- 
 interest has stood alive, alert, waiting 
 tor its return to power, expectant of re- 
 UL'wed success. Its opposition, there- 
 fore, to the working of No- License, has 
 been quick and powerful. It has fed 
 itself with the thought of revenge. 
 
 Put, now, the matter of a return to 
 license beyond the probability of imme- 
 diate reopening. Say. by your over- 
 whelming vote, that you intend to con- 
 tinue the existing plan, until it has had 
 full time for its effects; aud especially,
 
 until the shameless, lawle.-^ assail its upon 
 it by the nun-interest, a'ro brought to an 
 end. Let it be thoroughly understood 
 that the reversal of the decree will not 
 be made at present. Have you any 
 question that thus the whole aspect and 
 attitude of the opposition to No-License, 
 would change;' Have yon any question 
 that that opposition would become far 
 less persistent and intense? 
 
 Bear in mind, too, that the methods, 
 the evasions, the violations, on the part 
 of the dram-shops, are becoming more 
 thoroughly understood by the friends 
 of sobriety, and by the police and Pros- 
 ecuting Agents. Nor is it wide of the 
 mark to suggest, in general, that if the 
 breaches of the No- License legislation, 
 have taken a form which was not con- 
 templated, and for which provision was 
 not made, the legislation can be amend- 
 ed to meet the issue. I suppose it pos- 
 sible to make law keep pace with the 
 public need! 
 
 In fine, as touching the extent, the 
 permanence of the trial of No-License, 
 let it be unalterably sustained for a term 
 of years, such a term as has been given 
 to license. Let the whole body of good 
 citizens so signify their will on the 
 sixth of October. In that act, as in the 
 determination that lawlessness shall 
 cease its prevalence, you will meet one 
 of the essential, and hitherto nnsupplied 
 conditions of a jnst, reasonable trial of 
 the statute against the dram-shop?. 
 
 And now we come to the results 
 which can be specifically set down, 
 results drawn, in every instance, 
 from the official sources. In the 
 overwhelming support which they 
 give to No-Eicense, you are still to re- 
 member the fundamental considerations 
 which I have urged. You are to reflect 
 that though the favorable results were 
 far less computable and far less deci- 
 sive, you would be bound to oppose the 
 
 licensed dram-sliop You are to recol- 
 lect against what an energy and infamy 
 of lawless opposition, No-L ; cense lias 
 wrought its work. You are to recog- 
 nize the truth that a single year, under 
 such circumstances, is not sufficient for 
 the trial; and that the future gives 
 promise of still greater gains. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, in addressing yen 
 five months ago on the Success of No- 
 License, I first gave you the figures re- 
 lating to the total arrests for drunken- 
 ness in Norwich and New London, com- 
 paring the five months preceding No- 
 License, with the five months following. 
 Those figures still stand. They have 
 not been gainsaid by so much as a unit. 
 They were as follows: Norwich, under 
 license, 161; under No-License, 58. 
 New London, under license, 230; under 
 No-License, 57. Making similar com- 
 parison for the other half of the ten 
 months which have now pas-sed, we 
 have, Norwich, under license, 126; un- 
 der No-License, 83. New London, un- 
 der license, 104; under No-License, 104. 
 Or, summing up the arrests for drunk- 
 enness, in each city, for the ten months 
 preceding No-License, and the ten 
 months following, we have, Norwich, 
 under license, 287; under No-License, 
 141. New London, under license, 3a4; 
 under No-License, 161. As you per- 
 ceive, IN EACH CITY. No-LlCENSE SHOWS 
 LESS THAN ONE-HALF THE ARRESTED 
 OK, IN OTHER WORDS, THE OBSERVABLE 
 
 DRUNKENNESS. And that, in spite of 
 the unjust odds under which No-License 
 lr-s been obliged to contend! 
 
 Take next, us before, the arrests for 
 all crimes. In the comparison for the 
 first five months, dating each way from 
 the commencement of No-License, the 
 record stood, Norwich, under license, 
 414; under No-License, 283. New Lon- 
 doH, under license, 389; under No-Li- 
 cense, 114. For the succeeding five
 
 11 
 
 months, the record stands, Norwich, 
 under license 302; under No-License, 
 (omitting the arrests for non-compliance 
 with the dog-law, which went into ef- 
 fect May 1st, 1879) 263. New London, 
 under license, 256; under No-License, 
 203. Or, summing up the total arrests 
 for crime, in each city, for the ten 
 months preceding No-License, and the 
 ten months following, we have, Nor- 
 wich, under license, 716; under No-Li- 
 cense, 546. New London, under license, 
 645; under No-License, 317. As you 
 perceive, IN NORWICH,LESS THAN FOUR- 
 FIFTHS 'JHE CRIME IN GENERAL, AND IN 
 
 NEW LONDON, LESS THAN ONE-HALF. 
 And lhat, in spite of the unjust odds 
 against which No-License has had to 
 contend! 
 
 Take next, the jails of New London 
 County. Five months ago the statistics 
 were, Total number of commitments, 
 under lic( nse, 197; under No-License, 80. 
 Since that, reckoning, we have, under 
 hcense, 139; under No-License, 119. 
 Committed for drunkenness, for the first 
 period, under license, 87; under No-Li- 
 cense, 27. For the second period, under 
 license. 47; under No-License, 35. Or, 
 summing up the statistics of the jails, 
 for the ten months preceding No-Li- 
 cense, and the ten months following, 
 we have, total commitments for crime, 
 under license, 336; under No-License, 
 199. Total commitments for diunken- 
 ness, under license, 144; under No-Li- 
 cense 62. Average of jail inmates, un- 
 der license, 46; under No-License, 26. 
 As you perceive, LESS THAN TWO-THIRDS 
 
 THE TOTAL COMMITMENTS FOR CRIME; 
 LESS TUAN ONE-HALF THE COMMITMENTS 
 FOR DRUNKENNESS; AND LESS THAN 
 THREE-FIFTHS THE AVERAGE OF IN- 
 MATES OF JAIL. And that, in spite of 
 the unjust odds against which No-Li- 
 cense lias IK en obliged to contend! 
 Though we were to abide, simply and 
 
 solely by statistical results, what must 
 we judge concerning the fruits of 
 No-License? What must we conclude 
 concerning the law which single-hand- 
 ed, and against such tremendous and 
 criminal opposition, has won Mich a 
 triumph! The law which has lit 
 erally plucked its victory out of the 
 very jaws of the enemy! The law 
 which lias reduced drunkenness to 
 less than one-half, and crime in 
 general to less than two thirds! The 
 Ir.w which has well nigh half depopula- 
 ted our jails, and given added safety to 
 both property and person! 
 
 Does the street say that such a law is 
 to be repealed, in these cities, before the 
 ides of October? Does the rum-seller 
 declare that that statute is to b- swept 
 from the book in this enlightened, 
 Christian community? Does the dram 
 shop proclaim, with insolent, assurance. 
 that the good men of this town are to 
 help it in regaining its former destructive 
 power? It must be false. The claim 
 is preposterous. It is morally impossi- 
 ble that such should be the verdict in 
 Norwich and New London. The Hose 
 j of New England will not so diminish 
 her glory, and the fair City by the Sea 
 will not so dim her lustre! 
 
 And here, good friends, 1 ask your at- 
 tention to certain very significant infer- 
 ences, to be drawn from within the re- 
 sults which I have laid before you. They 
 are too important to be overlooked. For 
 example, you may have noticed lhat in 
 Norwich there was an increase of drunk- 
 enness during the last live months of 
 No-License, as compared with, its first 
 five months. You may have noted that 
 in New London, thej-eported diunken- 
 ness was 104 in the last five months, as 
 compared with the 07, in the live months 
 preceding. Did you somewhat won- 
 der at the change? It is wholly expli- 
 cable. It is vastly expressive. It be-
 
 IS 
 
 hooves you to treasure llic conclusion to 
 which it points. 
 
 You will remember that in April ami 
 .May there was currently reported a 
 marked increase in the saleot the .so-call- 
 ed non-intoxicating beers. The attention 
 of the Prosecuting Agent- was drawn to 
 the fact. Prosecutions were instituted 
 and seizures made. In the test cases 
 however, which were tried in June, the 
 State was defeated. The dealers denied 
 that the beers were intoxicating. They 
 brought witnesses to testify that they 
 were quite harmless, one citizen of 
 Norwich alleging that in a comparative- 
 ly brief time, he had drunk twenty 
 glasses without ill effects! The former 
 rum-sellers declared, privately and on 
 oath, that all they sold, or proposed to 
 sell, was the non-intoxicating drinks. 
 Well, see in the light of the past five 
 months how much that declaration 
 was worth. Infer how much the decla- 
 rations of tho-;e in the dram-shops are 
 ever worth! COIM IDKNTLY WITH TIIK 
 
 S( IIKNCK l)KKi: IM-X'ISIO.Ns \\HHII 1M1T 
 TIIK SIIIKI.]) OF LICKNSK OVKK 'I UK SO- 
 r\M,KI> NON-INTOXICANTS, THKKKWAS 
 A CKKAT AND SISTAINKl) I NCK KASK IN 
 
 miu.NKKNNKss. In Norwich, drunken 
 ness increased nearl\ one-half, and in 
 New London it was nearly doubled. In 
 Norwich, at the tim-j of the special beer 
 excitement, the monthly average of ob- 
 served drunkenness was less than 12. 
 Since then, the average has been nearly 
 17, the number in a single month going 
 as high as 2-J. In'New London, the 
 previous average was scarcely more 
 than 11. Since that tim.- it lias been 
 upwards of 20. 
 
 Now what does all that go to show, 
 fellow-citizens? Either that the so- 
 called non-intoxicating beers are j,in re- 
 ality intoxicating, Nir thai the whole 
 be,T traffic is bul a u'uise Cor the s-|]e of 
 the usual spirMuous li(juor.s! The con- 
 
 clusion is unavoidable; and, in either 
 case, the keepers of I he saloons arc con- 
 victed of disloyalty to truth, and crime 
 against the public welfare. They them- 
 selves have thus given us a timely 
 warning! It is really safer for the good, 
 when evil appears in its true character. 
 As Shakespeare wrote: 
 
 "If damn'd commotion so appeared. 
 
 In his true, native, and most proper shape. 
 
 You, reverend fathers, and these noble lords, 
 
 Had not been there, to dress the ugly form 
 
 Of base and bloody insurrection, 
 
 With your fair honours." 
 
 Had there been no such outburst of 
 falsehood and crime, some might have 
 been beguiled into thinking that, after 
 all, the rum-interest meant to respect 
 good faith and the intent of law. It 
 might have been supposed that, even 
 though the restraints should be relaxed, 
 no special harm would ensue. But now, 
 even the blindest are forced to see that 
 there is no safety for the public, save by 
 laying its inexorable hand on the very 
 throat of the rum-interest. It must be 
 strangled out and out. Evidently, that 
 i> the necessity now, just as in times 
 past. Rather than look toward the re- 
 peal of No-License in these cities, we 
 must look toward its receiving a further 
 adaptation to the emergency, at the 
 hands of the Legislature! 
 
 And that reminds me that there is, a 
 rumor afloat with regard to the rise of 
 club-rooms, as an evasion of No-License. 
 Somebody hints that they are places 
 where debauchery is rife, and where 
 the evils of the open dram-shop are sur- 
 passed. But what is there to indicate 
 it? The police records don't yet say so. 
 The sums-total ot crime and drunken- 
 ness don't really make it probable. If 
 the information comes from any respon- 
 sible source, at present, it would seem 
 it must come from the frequenters of 
 the dub-rooms! But do they mean to 
 tell us I hat such is the nature of their
 
 13 
 
 organizations V If they do so tell us, r 
 if from any oilier authentic source, that 
 tact is substantiated, they will find that 
 the remedy, as in the preceding case, 
 will lie, not in the direction of giving 
 up the No-License which they thus 
 evade, but in amending it so as to be 
 applicable to their summary dispersion 
 and punishment. Meantime, a good law 
 is not to bs held responsible for evasions 
 of it, cither alleged or real. 
 
 On the occasion of the former address, 
 fellow-citizens, I made answer to cer- 
 tain assertions of the rum-interest, re- 
 specting the financial relations between 
 No-License and its opposite. I averred 
 then, however, as I emphatically aver 
 now, that such considerations come not 
 near the prime merits of the case. In 
 one sense, they do not deserve mention. 
 In one view, I feel like craving your 
 pardon for the bringing forward ot 
 such concerns. To give them special 
 moment, were alike beneath the great- 
 ness of the issue itself, and the dictates 
 of citizenship and wisdom. If direct 
 financial advantage attends the steps of 
 righteousness, it may be proper to cite 
 the fact. It is incidentally an encour- 
 agement. But that is not fundamental. 
 The righteous, the beneficent thing 
 should be done, whether immediate 
 monetaiy gain be on this side or on that. 
 The priceless, supreme interests of hu- 
 manity are not to be sold in the sham- 
 bles. Yon suffer u blow to be struck 
 at, society, and government, and right 
 itself, when you are betrayed into such 
 a thought. 
 
 And yet, in the unprincipled assault 
 to which No-License has been con- 
 stantly subjected, it has been cast, at us 
 that the city's resources lack the thou- 
 sands of dollars which the former li- 
 cense-fees afforded, and that there is no 
 considerable offset. 1 say again, thai 
 it. were well, even then, that the money 
 
 previously received from licenses, should 
 
 be given up, for the sake of the sobrie- 
 ty, and good order, and comfort, and 
 personal reformation which has result- 
 ed. 
 
 There is, however, in part, a financial 
 recompense for the unhallowed gains 
 surrendered. The prosecutions of all 
 violations of No-License have 1 hem- 
 selves brought, in the, aggregate, a sur- 
 plus to the city treasury. 1 find, from 
 examination of the account for the fiscal 
 year ending September 1st, as rendered 
 by the Norwich Board of Selectmen, 
 the same noble Board which held 
 office last year, that the expenses of 
 the Town for the outside and alms- 
 house poor, are $7,064.76, less in 
 1879 than in 1878. You can judge 
 whether that would have been so, in 
 the absence of No-License. Do you 
 think that even the superb ability of 
 the Board, would have compassed that 
 result, with the liquor-saloons in their 
 former activity ? 
 
 The expenses for the poor in New 
 London, 1 have been unable to obtain. 
 
 It further appears that to thcCounty of 
 New London, there iias probably been a 
 saving, in the jail expenses, of upwards 
 of $2,000. Doubtless, to the State there 
 has been expense in excess of receipts, 
 but of that, I venture the State does not 
 complain. It is no more than belongs 
 to her whole function of combating 
 crime. And for even that, the law- 
 breakers, and not the law, arc to be 
 held accountable! 
 
 Thus does even the money question 
 which, at most, is as nothing, when 
 compared with the maintenance of law 
 and the public well-being, wear a very 
 different aspect from that portrayed by 
 the patrons of the dram-shops. The 
 financial offsets attest the yet higher 
 benefits, and lend emphasis to the more 
 essential gains.
 
 14 
 
 All, fellow-citizens, I wish it were 
 within my power to show you those 
 advantages of No-License which are 
 beyond the compass of figures! The 
 weak souls succored in their mortal 
 struggles; the guilty souls given van- 
 tage ground on which to stand, in the 
 consideration and preference of a holy 
 life; the young men stayed in their ru- 
 inous course; the families where drunk- 
 en brutality reigned, made peaceful 
 and safe; the almost naked clothed, I 
 and the almost starving fed; the bro- 
 ken-hearted mother made to rejoice, 
 and the sorrowing wife restored to her 
 cheer; they who were in the path to 
 eternal death, led to the salvation which 
 is the gift of Christ. All that has been 
 favored, and rendered the more prac- 
 ticable, by No-License. All the moral 
 and spiritual forces have been aided by 
 the decree against the dram-shops. 
 The actual sources of temptation have 
 been restrained, lessened. As in a 
 clearer light, and with the more ade- 
 quate support, the friends of God and 
 humanity have wrought. Will you 
 permit the beneficent statute to be re- 
 pealed? 
 
 Yet I have heard it suggested that the 
 unquestionably good results which 
 have been reached under No-License, 
 may not be justly cited as wholly its due. 
 It has been questioned whether they 
 ought not, in strictness, to be assigned 
 to the faithfulness of individual Tem- 
 perance workers. But the suggestion 
 and the questioning lack force. The 
 issue now before the people, in large 
 part, is a comparative one. It is made 
 the issue, of whether the comparison 
 between license and No-License, shows 
 a gain for the latter. To that issue, 
 that comparison, the reference to the 
 fidelity of Temperance workers has no 
 pertinence. For, as I have shown, all 
 such workers wrought as unremittingly 
 
 and as devotedly, under license, as un- 
 der No-Licinse. Their efforts are a 
 constant factor. I will even venture to 
 affirm that they made greater effort when 
 the dram-shop was licensed, than since 
 it has been legally forbidden. The need 
 of effort was more imperative; the prev- 
 alent ruin was more appalMng. Ask 
 him who, beyond all others, is the 
 leader, the hero of the rescue, and he 
 will tell you that, owing lo later ex- 
 haustion and ill-health, his Jaboiswere 
 most abundant when liceme was the 
 rule of the city. 
 
 No! Barring certain incidental ad- 
 vantages which may be credited to the 
 partial revival of business in general, 
 the changed aspect of things is due to 
 No License, and to that alone. For 
 the most part, ever} 7 oher force in the 
 community has remained unchanged. 
 The repressive statute was adopted, and 
 in spite of the bitterness, the lawless- 
 ness of the opposition to it, it has ac- 
 complished what we have mentioned. 
 Never was an effect more closely, more 
 manifestly, bound to its cause, than the 
 advance of the public welfare is bound 
 to the No-License statute. In its en- 
 forcement lies the wonder-working pow- 
 er. And of that we have an added evi- 
 dence, in the fact that against the No- 
 License statute, the rum-interest of the 
 city sets itself, as one man. That alone 
 were enough to show us our true 
 course! 
 
 And now, fellow-citizens, I must 
 close. I confess that I see not how 
 there can be the reversal at the polls, of 
 the verdict of last year. 
 
 When you look at the considerations 
 which are more supieme than even the 
 tabulated, proved results, they are seen 
 to be on the side of No-License. The is- 
 sue is, most profoundly, one of the 
 Maintenance of righteous law, as law. 
 It is between you, as law-abiding citi-
 
 zens, and those who habitually violate 
 the law relating to the rum traffic, even 
 though it be the law of their choice. It 
 is between you, as voters, and those 
 who, entering into sacred covenant with 
 you at the polls, seek to trample the will 
 of the people under their very feet, if it 
 be against, their destructive traffic. It 
 is, for the most part, between you, and 
 the keepers and patrons of tfie liquor- 
 saloons. Not simply between No-Li- 
 cense, and license rigorously restricted 
 and obeyed by those who invoke it, bul 
 between No-License, and the legalized, 
 manifold, accursed dram-shop. It is 
 between you, and those who, having 
 been aided by Temperance men in the 
 genuine application of license, oppose 
 the working of No-License by every un- 
 holy means within their reach. 
 
 Surely I am right, therefore, in say- 
 ing that the considerations which are 
 most utterly supreme, considerations 
 which admit of no alternative, are on 
 the side of No-License. 
 
 On that side, too, are the observed re- 
 sults. Though the opposition encoun- 
 tered has been so extreme, and though 
 the time has been inadequate, the re- 
 turns show an overwhelming gain on 
 the part of No-License. CRIME IN GEN- 
 ERAL HAS BEEN REDUCED TO TWO- 
 THIRDS; OBSERVED DRUNKENNESS TO 
 LESS THAN ONE-HALF. TlIE JAILS HAVE 
 BEEN ALMOST HALF DEPOPULATED. The 
 
 expenses for both the outside and the 
 alms-house poor, have been greatly re- 
 duced, and there has been a general ad- 
 vance in the public well-being. That 
 the results have not been still more fa- 
 vorable, the last five months even sur- 
 passing the earlier has been because the 
 rum-sellers have violated both truth and 
 statute, either by selling intoxicating 
 beers and claiming them to be non-in- 
 toxicating, or by making the sale of 
 
 beer the mere cover for the customary 
 spirituous liquors. 
 
 The results bespeak the maintenance 
 of No-License for the years to come. 
 
 As against the possibility of a deci- 
 sion of the people adverse to No-License, 
 there rises to my lips the prayer of 
 Goethe, "God h-jlp us, and enlighten 
 us for the future; that we may not so 
 much stand in our own way, but may 
 have clear notions of the consequences 
 of things." As against that possibility, 
 I remember the woe which we arc com- 
 bating, and recall the impassioned 
 words of Edward Irving, as he bewailed 
 a similar evil, "Thou k no west the ser- 
 pent cunning of this thing. It is killing 
 our children; it has already slain its tens 
 of thousands; this city is sick unto 
 death, and dying of the mortal wounds 
 which she hath received from it." As 
 against it, I invoke the sentiment of 
 the Right Honorable Mr. Glad- 
 stone, "A Government should so leg- 
 islate, as to make it easy to do right, 
 and difficult to do wrong." As against 
 it, I put the declaration of Cardi- 
 nal Manning, "I look upon the pro 
 hibition of the dram-shop, as no more 
 than the exercise of the legal right and 
 power of the people to protect them 
 selves." As against it, I bespeak the 
 merciful favor of Heaven, and the sym- 
 pathizing pity of every human heart. 
 
 I have confidence in the wisdom and 
 virtue of the people. We may say with 
 hopeful Lamariine, "I place my bark 
 on the highest promontory of the beach, 
 and trust the rising of the tide to make it 
 float." We may say with Wesley, 
 "The best of all is, God is with us." 
 We may trust that all the good will 
 rouse themselves for the conflict and 
 the triumph. We will invite the friends 
 of Temperance to overlook their minor 
 disagreements, and make common
 
 'CSB LIBRARY 
 
 caus<- against the common foe. We 
 will entreat them to stand shoulder to 
 shoulder and hand to hand. 
 
 I have somewhere read I hat in the 
 early spring of 1 (!:{, when the Federal 
 and confederate armies were confront- 
 ing each other, the bands chanced one 
 evening to be playing, on either side of 
 the dividing Rappahanm ck. On the 
 one side, it was "Star-Spangled Ban- 
 ner;'' on the other side, it was "Dixie." 
 One the one side it was "Columbia:" 
 on the other, it was "The Bonnie Blue 
 Flag." Presently one of the bands 
 struck up "Home, Sweet Home." 
 
 16 
 
 The other joined; and at the close, there 
 went up a simultaneous shout, in which 
 not even the listening angels, could tell 
 whether the acclaim was from tho-e 
 who wore the blue or the gray. In 
 both the camps, at thought of home, 
 there was something which d.'ew heart 
 to heart. 
 
 "Something on the soldier's cheek. 
 Washed off the powder's stain." 
 
 So let us be of one mind and one 
 heart, as we march to our conflict 
 against intemperance, to our victory 
 for "God and Native Land! 1 '