DEBATERS' HANDBOOK SERIES PROHIBITION OF THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC DEBATERS' HANDBOOK SERIES Debaters' Manual Capital Punishment (2d ed. rev.) Commission Plan of Municipal Govern- ment (3d ed. rev. and enl.) Central Bank of the United States Child Labor (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Compulsory Arbitration of Industrial Dis- putes (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Compulsory Insurance Conservation of Natural Resources Direct Primaries (3d ed. rev. and enl.) Election of United States Senators (2d ed. rev.) Employment of Women Federal Control of Interstate Corporations (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Free Trade vs. Protection Government Ownership of Railroads (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Government Ownership of Telegraph and Telephone Immigration Income Tax (2d ed. rev. and enl. ) Initiative and Referendum (3d ed. rev. and enl.) Monroe Doctrine Mothers' Pensions Municipal Ownership (2d ed. rev. and enl.) National Defense Open versus Closed Shop (2d ed.) Parcels Post (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Prohibition Recall (2d ed. rev. and enl.) Reciprocity Single Tax Trade Unions Woman Suffrage (2d ed. rev.) World Peace HANDBOOK SERIES Agricultural Credit European War Short Ballot Socialism Other titles in preparation Each volume, one dollar net Debaters 9 H an db o o k S er ie s SELECTED ARTICLES ON PROHIBITION OF THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC COMPILED BY LAMAR T. BEMAN, A. M., LL.D. Instructor in the East High School Cleveland, Ohio THE H. W, WILSON COMPANY WHITE PLAINS, N. Y., AND NEW YORK CITY 1915 Published November. 1915 EXPLANATORY NOTE "There are few social questions," says the report of the Royal Commission on the Liquor Traffic in Canada, "which have been more anxiously considered than that of Prohibition, and so great and important is the question involved, that almost every civilized nation has given considerable attention to it." While the Civil War in this country diverted attention from Pro- hibition to other public questions, the present war in Europe has had exactly the opposite effect. "If drunkenness is danger- ous in time of peace," says Guglielmo Ferrero, the eminent Italian scholar, in his article in the Pittsburgh Post of May 25, 1915, "it is much more so in time of war, when those who go to fight as well as those who remain at home have need of all their judgment and reflection for the common safety." The knowledge of this fact explains why the war in Europe directed attention to Prohibition. The day after war was declared the sale of absinthe was prohibited in all France by military decree, and this action was later ratified and made perpetual by act of the French Parliament. Russia prohibited the sale of vodka a few weeks after the beginning of the war. Somewhat less extreme measures have been taken by several others of the belligerent countries. In the United States within the same period of time the question has received more public attention than ever before. Since the beginning of the war ten states have adopted Pro- hibition as a state-wide measure while a number of others have considered and rejected it. It is now certain that Prohibition will come before the voters in several more states within the next year or two. Public attention has been directed to the question in other ways than by the act of a legislature or the popular vote on state-wide Prohibition. National Prohibition by amendment to the federal constitution has been debated and voted upon in the House of Representatives, and while defeated, yet it received a majority of the votes cast in that body. The National Anti- Saloon League has asked for $2,000,000 a year to carry on the contest, and has declared that it confidently vi EXPLANATORY NOTE expects to make the whole United States Prohibition territory by 1920. Whisky and brandy have been dropped from the official list of drugs given in the United States Pharmocopceia. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, in their triennial national convention, voted uanimously to endorse national and state- wide Prohibition. Since Prohibition has received so much attention in this country, and is certain to receive so much more in the near future, there is some reason for adding to the enormous volume of literature already in existence. In the Debaters' Handbook Series an effort is made to present fully and fairly both sides of public questions, to select the best of what has been written and to reproduce nothing that is bitter or passionate. Each Debaters' Handbook is in the nature of a great debate, in which there are many speakers on each side. The readers are the judges in this debate, and to these judges the question is now submitted. L. T. B. September 20, 1915. CONTENTS BRIEF Affirmative xi Negative xv BIBLIOGRAPHY Briefs xxi Special Material xxi Bibliographies xxii General References, Books, etc xxiii General References, Magazine Articles xxx Affirmative References, Books, etc xxxvi Affirmative References, Magazine Articles xxxix Negative References, Books, etc xlvi Negative References, Magazine Articles xlviii Special Negative Periodicals liii MAP Iv INTRODUCTION I GENERAL DISCUSSION Coleman, Walter M. Human Biology 9 Hall, Winfield S. Relation of Alcohol to Nutrition. Is Alcohol a Food ? Journal of the American Medical Association 10 Hall, Winfield S. Truth About Alcohol and Food Journal of the American Medical Association II Stewart, G. N. Manual of Physiology 12 Wholey, C. C. Alcohol and Heredity West Virginia Medical Journal 13 Brief Excerpts 14 Fisher, Isaac. Rum and Remedies .. Everybody's Magazine 16 Colvin, D. Leigh. Congressional Debate on National Pho- hibition Intercollegiate Statesman 23 viii CONTENTS AFFIRMATIVE DISCUSSION Hanly, J. Frank. I Hate the Liquor Traffic 31 Ingersoll, Robert G. Denunciation of Alcohol . . Commoner 32 Campbell, Philip P. Hobson Amendment Congressional Record 33 Ferguson, William P. F. Prohibition Prohibits New Encyclopedia of Social Reform 36 Hobson, Richmond P. Truth About Alcohol Congressional Record 37 Fisher, Irving. Labor Would Gain by Prohibition American Issue, Ohio Edition 52 Capper, Arthur. Prohibition in Kansas 53 McGuire, A. J. Relationship of the Liquor Traffic to Agri- culture in Northeastern Minnesota 61 Report of the Northeast Experiment Farm at Grand Rap- ids, Minnesota 61 Bryan, William Jennings. Case against Alcohol Commoner 65 Blue, Fred O. Prohibition in West Virginia Pittsburgh Dispatch 72 Bryan, William Jennings. Question of Compensation Commoner 73 Compensation Vindicator 75 Odell, Samuel W. Argument in Favor of Prohibition, 1914 California Official 77 United States Supreme Court. Crowley vs. Christensen. . . 78 Sheldon, Charles M. What Prohibition Has Done for Kansas Independent 81 Connelly, John R. Prohibition in Kansas Congressional Record 83 President's Homes Commission. Report. Total Alcoholic Drink Bill 87 Brief Excerpts 88 NEGATIVE DISCUSSION Miinsterberg, Hugo. Prohibition and Social Psychology. . McClure's Magazine 93 Williams, Dr. Edward H. Question of Alcohol 107 Liquor Men's Sweeping Claims New York Times 113 Taft, William H. Four Aspects of Civic Duty 117 CONTENTS ix Committee of Fifty. Summary of Investigations. Pro- hibition 118 Underwood, Oscar W. National Prohibition Congressional Record 120 Schuldt, William. Argument against Prohibition, 1914 California Official 138 Quigley, Eugene. Compensation 140 Ohio Home Rule Almanac. Vote "No" on Prohibition 144 Bartholdt, Richard. Ten Reasons Why Prohibition Is Wrong Congressional Record 144 Other Side of the Prohibition Question Bismarck Daily Tribune 157 Goebel, Herman P. Personal Rights and Liberties of Man Congressional Record 160 Mann, James R. National Prohibition Congressional Record 163 Brief Excerpts 167 BRIEF Resolved, That Prohibition of the liquor traffic should be adopted as a state- wide (or national) measure. AFFIRMATIVE INTRODUCTION I. The liquor problem has baffled all attempts at solution since the beginning of civilization. II. Recent events have brought Prohibition forward as the one possible solution. A. Scientific research has shown the true nature of alcohol B. The European war has made enforced Temperance necessary in several countries. C. Eighteen of our states have already adopted Prohi- bition, and others will soon vote on it. D. David Lloyd George has declared that only "root and branch" methods will avail anything in dealing with the liquor traffic. . III. All other remedies have failed, A. They have failed to reduce the consumption of alcohol, or in other words, to accomplish anything, PBOOF I. The liquor traffic is an intolerable burden. A Scientific research shows that alcohol is a narcotic habit-forming poison. 1. Its use causes many thousand deaths a year. [See Report of the Medico- Actuarial Mortality Investigation] a. Excessive use soon results in death. b. Moderate use shortens life materially. c. Much of the fatal heart and liver trouble is caused by the moderate use of alcohol* 2. Its use makes a person more susceptible to disease and less able to resist it xii BRIEF 3. At least 25 per cent of the insanity is due to alcohol. 4. It makes many degenerates among the descendants of users. B. Alcohol lowers the standard of character and public morals. 1. It causes a large part of all the crime. 2. It creates a considerable part of the pauperism 3. It is one of the leading causes of commercialized vice. 4. It is responsible for a large part of the divorces and desertions. 5. It causes most of the child misery. 6. It corrupts the government and makes cowards of men in public life. C. It is a staggering economic burden. 1. About two billion dollars a year are spent for alcoholic liquors in the United States. a. This is about twice the national debt. b. It means that the average family pays $100 a year for alcoholic liquor. 2. The indirect cost is much greater than this. a. Alcohol makes labor inefficient. b. It causes many industrial accidents. c. The cost to the community through public care and attention to crime, poverty, insanity, vice, degeneracy, desertion, ancT premature death is incalculable. II. Prohibition is the logical and effective remedy. A. It has been remarkably successful wherever given a fair trial. 1. It has decreased the consumption of alcohol and therefore lessened its evils. o. The per capita consumption in the whole United States is 22.5 gallons, in Kansas less than 4 gallons and this mostly consumed near the border. 2. It has reduced insanity. a. Maine has a smaller percentage of insanity than New England. b. Kansas and North Dakota each have a smaller BRIEF xiii percentage of insanity than die west north central states. 3. It has reduced poverty. a. Maine has fewer paupers in almshouses in proportion to its population than New Eng- land and almost twice as great a percentage of its people own their own homes. b. North Dakota and Kansas have a lower per- centage of paupers in almshouses than the west north central states as a whole, and more of their people own their own homes. 4. It has decreased degeneracy. a. Maine has a smaller percentage of degeneracy than New England. b. Both Kansas and North Dakota have a smaller percentage than the west north central division. 5. It has reduced crime. a. Maine has fewer sentenced prisoners than New England per population. b. North Dakota has a lower percentage than the west north Central states. c. Kansas has a higher ratio because its laws are more strictly enforced. d. Arrests decreased 33 per cent in Georgia after state-wide Prohibition was adopted. 6. It has helped education. a. Maine has a larger percentage of children of school age enrolled in school than New England. b. Kansas and North Dakota have a smaller per- centage of illiteracy than the west north central division and Kansas has a larger per- centage of its children in school 7. The death and divorce statistics of the United States are in such a condition that any fair comparison of diem is impossible. The same is true as regards statistics of money in savings banks. B. It is no argument against Prohibition that it has not prevented all drinking. xiv BRIEF 1. It is as well enforced as the average law. 2. Laws against murder and burglary don't absolutely prevent these crimes. a. In July, 1912, there was an average of one murder a day in New York City. Does that prove that the law against murder in the metropolis should be repealed? C. A prohibitive law will work better in the second gen- eration. i. The children born in a Prohibition state will see so little of liquor selling and intoxication that fewer of them will have a temptation to violate the law. D. It is no argument against Prohibition to say it is confiscation. i. Under the police power the state governments have always had the right to pass any law for the health, safety, or good morals of the people. 2. Other laws accomplish the same results. a. Confiscation of impure food. b. Confiscation of false weights and measures. c. The freeing of the slaves confiscated many times as much property as is now invested in the liquor business. d. Killing of diseased cattle. 3. Liquor stands on the same plane as opium, cocaine, and other poisonous drugs. E. Prohibition has not injured business. 1. The governors of Kansas, one after another, have testified to this fact. 2. Commissioner Blue in West Virginia says the same of his state, III. All other remedies have failed. A. Local option has failed. 1. It has not decreased the consumption of liquor. 2. It is*easily evaded because districts are so small liquor can easily be obtained outside the district, smuggled into it, or bought by the mail order system, thus taking drinking more into the home.. 3. It corrupts local government. ;.. - BRIEF xv B. High license or so-called "model license" has failed. 1. It was never intended to do any real good, but serves a sham substitute for Prohibition. 2. It has not decreased the consumption of alcohol. C. The dispensary system has failed. 1. It has not greatly decreased the consumption of alcohol. 2. It has taken drinking more into the home. D. The liquor traffic refuses to obey the law no matter what it is. It won't be regulated and therefore must be abolished. 1. On December 18, 1911, the Baptist Brotherhood reported that they had investigated 1,630 saloons in Cleveland and found 1,534 open and doing business in direct violation of the law of Ohio. 2. Selling liquor to minors is a common practice, though unlawful. 3. Laws to prevent selling liquor to drunken persons are almost universally violated. NEGATIVE INTRODUCTION I. Prohibition means the prevention by law of the manufao f acture or sale of intoxicating liquors. II. It is not sufficient for the Affirmative to prove evils that are due to the use of alcoholic liquors, but they must also justify the remedy they advocate. A. They must show that Prohibition will remedy the evils of intemperance. B. They must prove that it will not produce new evils. C. They must show that it is practicable. PROOF I. Prohibition is wrong in principle. -S A. It violates private personal rights. 1. What a man may eat or drink is not properly a. matter of legislation, 2. Many of our best people are accustomed to a mod- erate use of alcoholic liquors, and to them Pro- hibition would be an unreasonable hardship. 3. There are in the United States many people of xvi BRIEF foreign birth who have always been accustomed to use liquors, to whom Prohibition would be an especial hardship. 4. "Better free than sober," is the opinion of many of our ablest men, such as Prof. Hugo Miinster- berg of Harvard. B. It violates sacred property rights. 1. Practically all Prohibitionists ridicule the idea of compensating people now in the liquor business. 2. Almost $800,000,000 is now invested in the manu- facture of liquor, and much more in its sale and in allied industries. 3. The federal and state governments, by licensing and imposing special taxes, have recognized the manufacture and sale of liquor as a legitimate business. 4. To prohibit the further manufacture and sale of liquor would be confiscation pure and simple. 5. The state and federal governments, because of the dignity of their relation to their citizens and to private property, ought not to be guilty of such an act. 6. Confiscation, once accomplished on so enormous a scale, would be an unwholesome precedent apt to be followed on other occasions. 7. There are many men in the business who are now past middle life and know no other business. Their means of livelihood would be swept away by Prohibition, but might be preserved under some law by which reform is made gradual. C. State-wide Prohibition creates disrespect for law. 1. In most of the cities in Prohibition states the law is not enforced. 2. Non-enforcement and the resulting violation with impunity of one law leads to disrespect for all law. D. All good reforms are gradual. Radical reforms are seldom good. "Hurricane reform" is never good in its ultimate results. II. Prohibition is unwise as a policy. A. It would mean an enormous loss in taxes, a complete reorganization of our tax systems. BRIEF xvii 1. In 1914 the federal government received $245,385,000, or one-third of its income, from liquor taxes. 2. State and local governments also receive large amounts. 3. This additional tax put on other industry would be a heavy burden and would be apt to produce industrial disorder for some years to come. B. The men and capital made idle would create an indus- trial depression. 1. Eighty thousand men would be thrown out of work, and in trying to get work in other indus- tries, would over-supply the labor market and reduce wages. 2. Eight hundred million dollars of capital idle, much of it in bankruptcy proceedings, would make worse the depression that must follow Prohi- bition generally adopted. 3. Perhaps as many more men and as much more capital in allied industries would be involved. a. Thousands of farmers who sell grain to brew- eries and distilleries or grapes to wine makers, would find no market for their produce. b. Railroads and express companies that have shipped liquor would find their business cur- tailed and profits reduced. Many workmen would be laid off as a result. c. Thousands of salesmen, jobbers, bartenders, waiters, teamsters would be added to the army of unemployed. 4. "This is not a theory but a condition," one that certainly will develop, and what are the Prohi- bitionists going to do about it? 5. It did not occur when a sparsely settled agricul- tural western or southern state adopted Prohi- bition, but it will happen when the first large and populous industrial state does it C. The foreigners who have been coming to this country a million or more a year, in time of peace, will settle elsewhere and build up rival powers in Canada and South America. xviii BRIEF i. There are more people today in New York City and Chicago than there are in Canada or the Argentine Republic, and more than one-third of them are foreign born and as many more are of foreign parentage. III. Prohibition, as a national or state-wide measure, is imprac- ticable. A. It has failed where tried. 1. It is unenforceable. a. Large amounts of liquor are sold and con- sumed in all Prohibition states. b. In all the larger cities of the Prohibition states the law is openly violated. 2. It has always been clear that it is impossible to legislate men good. 3. The law can't regulate and change the appetites and habits of men. 4. Prohibition as a state-wide measure is usually soon repealed. a. Of the eighteen that have now adopted Pro- hibition, only three have had it for ten years. b. Thirty states have adopted Prohibition at one time or another, and fifteen have repealed, some of them two or three times. c. Rhode Island has adopted it three times and each time has soon repealed it. B. With all this amount of Prohibition, the actual con- sumption of liquor has steadily increased, which shows the scheme is an absolute failure. C. Prohibition leads to worse evils than drinking. Men unable to obtain liquor will take to excesses in some other direction. 1. The drug evil, the use of morphine, cocaine, etc., is found to be increasing much faster in Pro- hibition states than in the other states. 2. Liquors with a high percentage of alcohol and small bulk take the place of beer and are sold in "blind tigers" and "speak-easies" by the lowest class of people. 3. Patent medicines with a large percent of alcohol are openly sold in every Prohibition state. BRIEF xix 4. Most of the liquor unlawfully sold in Prohibition states is adulterated and poisonous, and the harm done by its use is much greater. D. The liquor traffic continues in Prohibition states, but it is entirely unregulated and uncontrolled, i. It is outside of the protection of the law and is carried on secretly. E. Public sentiment will not enforce a state-wide Prohi- bition law. 1. No law will be obeyed unless it has back of it the force of public opinion. 2. Few of our states are so homogeneous in popula- tion that all parts of the state will favor Pro- hibition. a. City ideals and rural ideals differ as regards drinking. b. Towns with a large percentage of foreigners and others mostly native will have different ideals. 3. Therefore local option is preferable to state-wide Prohibition. IV. There are better methods of dealing with the liquor problem. A. Local option. i. This has public opinion back of it. B. The model license. i. This secures wholesome regulation of the traffic. C. Gradual repression. 1. Gradual reduction of the percentage of alcohol in liquor will slowly remove what cannot be anni- hilated at one stroke. 2. Business, capital, and labor can adjust themselves to gradual changes. D. Education. 1. Teach only the truth about alcohol to children. 2. Teach the results of alcohol to adults also. 3. Teach Temperance and self-restraint. There will always be temptations and people should be taught to meet them. BIBLIOGRAPHY An asterisk (*) preceding a reference indicates that the entire article or a part of it has been reprinted in this volume. A dagger (t) is used to mark a few of the best of the other references. Many of the magazine articles and pamphlets listed here, as well as similar material that may be published after this volume is issued, may be secured at reasonable rates from the Wilson Package Library operated by H. W. Wilson Company. BRIEFS Brookings, W. D., and Ringwalt, R. C. Briefs for Debate. Longmans. 1905. pp. 172-5, Resolved, That State Prohibition is preferable to high license as a method of dealing with intemperance. Robbins, E. C. High School Debate Book. McClurg. 1912. pp. 177-88, Resolved, That as society is constituted at present the liquor saloon performs desirable social functions. Vanderbilt Observer. 34:44-6. N. 'n. G. W. Follin. Resolved, that local option is preferable to state-wide Prohibition as a means of dealing with intemperance. SPECIAL MATERIAL Many pamphlets and leaflets, and some books, not listed in this Bibliography, are printed by the different organizations and agencies that are endeavoring to mold public sentiment on the liquor question. This material may be obtained, much of it free, by writing the following addresses: For Affirmative Material Anti- Saloon League of America, Westerville, O. There are branch offices of the league in each state and in many cities. Intercollegiate Prohibition Association, 189 West Madison Street, Chicago, III International Reform Bureau, 206 Pennsylvania Avenue, S. E., Washington, D. C. National Temperance Society and Publication House, 373 Fourth Avenue, New York City. xxii BIBLIOGRAPHY National Woman's Christian Temperance Union, 1730 Chicago Avenue, Evanston, 111. Prohibition National Committee, 106 North La Salle Street, Chicago, 111. Scientific Temperance Federation, 23 Trull Street, Boston, Mass. For Negative Material Iconoclast Publishing Co., 1169 Transportation Building, Chi- cago, 111. Manufacturers' and Dealers' Association of America, 36 West Randolph Street, Chicago, 111. Manufacturers' and Merchants' Association of New Jersey, 776 Broad Street, Newark, N. J. National Wholesale Liquor Dealers' Association of America, 301 United Bank Building, Cincinnati, O. Ohio Home Rule Association, 22 Garfield Place, Cincinnati, O. United States Brewers' Association, 50 Union Square, New York City. BIBLIOGRAPHIES Anti-Saloon League. Catalogue of Temperance Posters. (Price list.) American Issue Publishing Co., Westerville, O. Anti- Saloon League. Catalogue of Temperance Publications. (Price list.) American Issue Publishing Co., Westerville, O. Askew, John B. Pros and Cons. Dutton. 1912. Brookings, W. D., and Ringwalt, R. C. Briefs for Debate. Longmans. 1905. California Libraries, News Notes of. 9:223-6. Ap. '14. State- wide Prohibition; a select list of references to material in the California State Library. Edwards, Richard H. Liquor Problem. (Studies in American Social Conditions, No. I.) Madison, Wis. 1908. French, Richard V. Nineteen Centuries of Drink in England, pp. xi-xx. Longmans. 1884. Hart, Albert Bushnell. Manual of American History, Diplo- macy and Government. Harvard University. 1908. Section 228, pp. 367-8, Regulation of the Liquor Traffic. Harvard University. A Guide to Readings in Social Ethics and Allied Subjects. 1910. pp. 122-31, The Liquor Problem, by Ray M. McConnell. BIBLIOGRAPHY xxiii Koren, John. Economic Aspects of the Liquor Problem, PP- 313-22. Houghton. 1899. Matson, Henry. References for Literary Workers pp. 179-81. McClurg. 1893. Monahan, M. Text Book of True Temperance pp. 298-308. United States Brewers' Association. 1911. National Temperance Society and Publication House. Cata- logue of Temperance Publications. (Annual.) National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Bibliography for the Study of Temperance. (Pamphlet.) National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Temperance Books for Libraries. (Leaflets.) Prohibition Year Book. (Annual.) 1910, pp. 211-2; 1911, PP. 21-36. Reeder, Charles W. Select List of References on License of the Liquor Traffic in the United States. Ohio State Uni- versity Library. 1912. Robbins, E. C. High School Debate Book. pp. 177-88. McClurg. 1912. United States Brewers' Association. Five Feet of Information for Impartial Students of the Liquor Problem. (Pamphlet.) 1910. Vanderbilt Observer. 34:44-6. N. f n. Warner, Harry S. Social Welfare and the Liquor Problem. Intercollegiate Prohibition Association. 1913. Classified bibliography at the end of each chapter. GENERAL REFERENCES Books and Pamphlets Allbutt, Clifford, and Rolleston, Humphrey D., eds. A System of Medicine. Vol. II, Part I, pp. 901-37. "Alcoholism." Macmillan. 1909. Allen, William H. Civics and Health. Ginn. 1909. Aschaffenburg, Gustav. Crime and Its Repression. Translated by Adalbert Albracht. pp. 69-88. Little, Brown. 1913. Bagnell, Robert. Economic and Moral Aspects of the Liquor Business, and the Rights and Responsibilities of the State in the Control Thereof. Funk. 1912. xxiv BIBLIOGRAPHY Barker, John M. Saloon Problem and Social Reform. Everett Press, Boston. 1905. *Bliss, W. D. P., ed. New Encyclopedia of Social Reform. Funk. 1908. Articles on: Prohibition, 966-72; Temperance, 1212; Liquor Traffic, 718- 20; Intemperance, 636; Liquor Consumption, 716-8; Prohibition Party, 972-5; Local Option, 725; Local Prohibition, 726; High License, 572. Blythe, Samuel G. Cutting It Out. Forbes & Co. Chicago. 1912. Boies, Henry M. Prisoners and Paupers. Putnam. 1893. Chap, ii, pp. 1 37-69. Intemperance as a Cause. Brown, William G. New Politics. Houghton. 1914. pp. 145-62. The South and the Saloon. Bryce, Alexander. Laws of Life and Health. Lippincott 1912. Burns, John. Labor and Drink. Kent & Matthews. London. 1904. Buxton, Noel, and Hoare, Walter. Temperance Reform. Fisher Unwin. London. 1901. pp. 165-210 of The Heart of the Empire. *California. Amendments to the Constitution and Proposed Statutes, with Arguments Respecting the Same, to Be Sub- mitted to the Electors of the State, pp. 56-7. 1914. fCanada. Report of the Royal Commission on the Liquor Traffic in Canada. S. E. Dawson. 1895. Clum, Franklin D. Inebriety, Its Causes, Its Results, Its Rem- edy. Lippincott. 1888. Committee of Fifty. Physiological Aspects of the Liquor Prob- lem. Houghton. 1903. Committee of Fifty. Liquor Problem in Its Legislative Aspects. Houghton. 1897. Committee of Fifty. Economic Aspects of the Liquor Problem. Houghton. 1899. Committee of Fifty. Substitutes for the Saloon. Houghton. 1901. ^Committee of Fifty. Liquor Problem : A Summary of the In- vestigations Conducted by the Committee of Fifty, 1893-1903. Houghton. 1905. Crafts, Dr. and Mrs. Wilbur F., and Leitch, Mary and Margaret. Intoxicants and Opium in all Lands and Times. Interna- tional Reform Bureau. 1900. Crooker, Joseph. Problems in American Society. Geo. H. Ellis, Boston. 1889. pp. 117-58. The Root of the Temperance Problem. BIBLIOGRAPHY Crothers, T. D. Drink Problem. Appleton. 1893. pp. 277-304 of Factors in American Civilization. Cutten, George B. The Psychology of Alcoholism. Scribner. 1909. fCyclopaedia of Temperance and Prohibition. Funk. 1891. A reference book of facts, statistics, and general information on all phases of the drink question, the temperance movement, and the Prohibition agitation. Devine, Edward T. Principles of Relief. Macmillan. 1910. Chap. 12, pp. 144-50. Intemperance. Devon, James. Criminal and the Community. Lane. 1912. Earle, Alice M. Stage and Tavern Days. Macmillan. 1905. Eaton, E. L. Winning the Fight against Drink. Jennings & Graham. 1912. fEly, Richard T. Outlines of Economics. Macmillan. 1903. Book 2, chap. 4, pp. 236-40. Harmful Consumption. Emerson, Edward R. Beverages, Past and Present. Putnam. 1908. Fanshawe, E. L. Liquor Legislation in the United States and Canada. CasselL 1892. fFernald, James C. Economics of Prohibition. Funk 1890. tFisher, Irving. The Attitude of the College Man Toward Alcohol May, 1915. In the Eli Spring Book and reprinted as a pamphlet. Forel, August Hygiene of Nerves and Mind in Health and Disease. Translated by Austin Aikins. John Murray, Lon- don. 1907. Franklin, Fabian. People and Problems. Holt. 1908. pp. 1 3 1-6. Why Some Honest People Are not Prohibitionists. French, Richard V. Nineteen Centuries of Drink in England. Longmans. 1884. Gould, E. R. L, Popular Control of the Liquor Traffic. CasselL 1895. Green, Sanford M. Crime, Its Nature, Causes, Treatment, and Prevention. Lippincott 1889. Article 2, chap. 4, p. 36. Intemperance as a Cause of Crime. Article 4, chap. 2, pp. 290-300. The Prevention of Intemperance. fGustaf son, Axel. Foundation of Death : A Study of the Drink Question. Funk. 1887. fGustafson, AxeL World's Drink Problem. Hunt & Eaton. 1895- pp. 127-85 of My Brother and I. Henderson, Charles R. Introduction to the Study of the De- xxvi BIBLIOGRAPHY pendent, Defective, and Delinquent Classes, and to Their Social Treatment. Heath. 1901. pp. 199-201. Inebriates, pp. 251-2. Alcoholism. Henderson, Charles R. Preventive Agencies and Methods, pp. 214-8. Charities Publication Committee. 1910. Henderson, Mary F. Aristocracy of Health. Harper. 1906. Horsley, Sir Victor, and Sturge, Mary G. Alcohol and the Human Body. Macmillan. 1908. Howell, William H. Text-book of Physiology. W. B. Saund- ers Co. 1913. Hunt, Reid. Studies in Experimental Alcoholism. Govern- ment Printing Office. 1907. Hygienic Laboratory Bulletin 33. Public Health and Marine Hospital Service of the United States. Hutchinson, Woods. Handbook of Health. Hough ton. 1911. Jevons, W. Stanley. Methods of Social Reform. Macmillan. 1883. pp. 253-76. Experimental Legislation in the Drink Traffic. Jewett, Frances G. The Gulick Hygiene Series. Ginn. Johnson, William E. Federal Government and the Liquor Traffic. American Issue Publishing Co., Westerville, O. 1911. Kelynack, Theophilus N., ed. The Drink Problem in Its Medico- Sociological Aspects. Dutton. 1907. Kintzing, Pearce. Long Life and How to Attain It. Funk. 1908. Lalor, John J. Cyclopedia of Political Science, Political Econ- omy, and of the Political History of the United States. C: E. Merrill. 1890. Vol. 3, pp. 378-80. Prohibition in the United States, Alexander Johnston. Lincoln, Abraham. Complete Works. Edited by J. G. Nicolay and John Hay. Lamb Publishing Co., New York. Vol. i, pp. 193-209. Address before the Springfield Washingtonian Temperance Society, February 22, 1842. Lombroso, Cesare. Crime, Its Causes and Remedies. Trans- lated by Henry P. Horton. pp. 88-101 ; 265-74. Little, Brown. 1912. Lydston, G. Frank. Diseases of Society. Lippincott. 1908. McLaughlin, A. C., and Hart, A. B. Cyclopedia of American Government. Appleton. 1914. Vol. 3, pp. 76-8. Prohibition. Vol. 2, pp. 355-60. Liquor Legislation. BIBLIOGRAPHY xxvii Massachusetts. Drunkenness in Massachusetts: Conditions and Remedies. Special Report of the Board of Trustees of the Foxborough State Hospital. Wright & Potter Printing Co. 1910. Massachusetts. Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of the Statistics of Labor. March, 1896. Part i, pp. 1-416. Relation of the Liquor Traffic to Pauperism, Crime, and Insanity. fMedico-Actuarial Mortality Investigation. Compiled and Pub- lished by the Association of Life Insurance Medical Direc- tors and the Actuarial Society of America, New York, 1914. Vol. 5, pp. 11-13; 66-93. Mitchell, Kate. Drink Question, Its Social and Medical Aspects. Swan, Sonnenschein & Co. London. National Information Bureau. The Pros and Cons of Prohi- bition ; Extracts from the Debate in the House of Repre- sentatives. Cincinnati 1915. Newton, John. Our National Drink Bill. James Nisbet & Co. London. 1909. Palmer, Charles F. Inebriety, Its Source, Prevention, and Cure. Union Press. Philadelphia. 1896. Partridge, G. E. Studies in the Psychology of Intemperance, p. 230. et seq. Sturgis & Walton Co. 1912. Pereira, Henry H. Intemperance. Longmans. 1905. Phelps, Edward B. The Supposed Death Rates of Abstainers and Non-Abstainers and Their Lack of Scientific Value. Thrift Publishing Co. New York. 1913. Potter, Henry C. The Drink Problem in Modern Life. Thomas Y. Crowell & Co. 1905. fRace Betterment Foundation. Proceedings of the First Na- tional Conference on Race Betterment, Battle Creek, Mich. January, 1914. pp. 181-222. Reade, A. Arthur, ed. Study and Stimulants. Lippincott 1883. Reid, G. Archdall. Principles of Heredity. Chapman & Hall, London. 1906. Reinsch, Paul S. Readings on American State Government Ginn. 1911. Chap. 7, PP- 338-63. Riis, Jacob A. How the Other Half Lives. Scribner. 1890. Chap. 1 8. The Reign of Rum. Rivers, W. H. R. The Influence and Other Drugs on Fatigue. Edward Arnold. London. 1908. xxviii BIBLIOGRAPHY *Rosenau, Milton J. Preventive Medicine and Hygiene. Ap- pleton. 1913. Rowntree, Joseph, and Sherwell, Arthur. British Gothenberg Experiments and Public House Trusts. Hodder & Stough- ton, London. 1901. Rowntree, Joseph, and Sherwell, Arthur. Taxation of the Liquor Trade. Macmillan. 1906. fRowntree, Joseph, and Sherwell, Arthur. Temperance Prob- lem and Social Reform. Thomas Whittaker. New York. 1899. Samuelson, James. History of Drink. Trubner & Co. Lon- don. 1878. Shadwell, Arthur. Drink, Temperance, and Legislation. Long- mans. 1902. Snowden, Philip. Socialism and the Drink Question. Inde- pendent Labor Party. 1908. Souttar, Robinson. Alcohol, Its Place and Power in Legisla- tion. Hodder & Stoughton s London. 1904. Starling, Ernest H. Principles of Human Physiology. Lea & Febiger. Philadelphia. 1912. Stearns, J. N. Temperance in all Nations. National Tem- perance Society and Publication House. 1893. Stelzle, Charles. Workingman and Social Problems. Revell. 1903. Chap. 3, pp. 37-50. The Workingman and the Saloon. Stewart, G. N. Manual of Physiology, pp. 618-9. Wm. Wood & Co. New York. 1914. Sullivan, W. C. Alcoholism, a Chapter in Social Pathology. James Nisbet & Co. London. 1906. Thomann, Gallus. Inebriety and Crime. 1889. United States Commissioner of Labor. Fifth Special Report. The Gothenberg System of Liquor Traffic. E. R. L. Gould. 1893- United States Commissioner of Labor. Twelfth Annual Report. The Economic Aspects of the Liquor Problem. 1898. United States Senate. Document No. 233, 57th Congress, First Session. (Vol. VIII of the Memoirs of the National Academy of Science.) An Experimental Inquiry Regarding the Nutritive Value of Alcohol. W. O. Atwater and F. G. Benedict. *United States Senate. Document No. 644. 6oth Congress, Second BIBLIOGRAPHY Session. January 8, 1909. Report of the President's Homes Commission. Part 2, Chap. 4, pp. 230-50. fUnited States Senate. Document No. 48. 6ist Congress, First Session. May 17, '09. Some Scientific Conclusions Concern- ing the Alcoholic Problem and Its Practical Relations to Life. Papers Read at the Semi-Annual Meeting of the American Society for the Study of Alcohol and Other Drug Narcotics, at Washington, D. C. March 17-9, 1909. United States Senate, Document No. 146. 6ist Congress. First Session. July 29, '09, Report of the Judiciary Committee. To Regulate Interstate Commerce in Intoxicating Liquors. United States Senate. Document No. 958. fed Congress. Third Session. December 3, '12. Does the Moderate Use of Alco- hol Lower the Health and Efficiency, and Should It Be Pro- hibited Among Officers and Officials of the Military, Naval, and Civil Services. L. Mervin Maus. United States Senate. 6czd Congress. Second Session. February 26 to March 7, 1912. Sale of Intoxicating Liquors ; Hearings Before a Sub-committee of the Committee on the District of Columbia. United States Senate, (%d Congress, Second Session. April 16 and 25, May I, 1914. Hearings before a Sub-committee of the Committee on the Judiciary on a Resolution Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution Prohibiting the Sale, Manu- facture and Importation of Intoxicating Liquors. Warbasse, James P. Medical Sociology. Appleton. 1909. fWheeler, E. J. Prohibition; the Principle, the Policy, and the Party. Funk. 1880. tWilliams, Henry S. Alcohol; How It Affects the Individual, the Community, and the Race. Century. 1909. Wilson, George R. Clinical Studies in Vice and in Insanity. Macmillan. 1899. Wilson, George R. Drunkenness. Swan, Sonnenschein & Co. London. 1893. Wing, Henry A. Maine's War upon the Liquor Traffic: A Series of Historical Articles. Portland Evening Express. Wright, Carroll D. Outline of Practical Sociology. Longmans. 1906. Chap. 23, pp. 390-403. The Temperance Question. xxx BIBLIOGRAPHY Magazine Articles American Magazine. 71 : 371-7. Ja. 'n. Drinking in Dry Places. American Magazine. 74:708-17. O. '12. Fighting the Deadly Habits. Samuel Merwin. Annals of the American Academy. 32:471-615. N. '08. Regula- tion of the Liquor Traffic. (Symposium.) Appleton's Magazine. 12:6-15. Jl. '08. Does Prohibition Pay? Charles F. Aked and George C. Lawrence. Appleton's Magazine. 12 : 183-90. Ag. '08. Maine after 57 Years of Prohibition. Holman Day. Appleton's Magazine. 12 : 343-50. S. '08. Iowa Still Fighting. Trumbull White. Arena. 4 : 723. N. '91. The True Politics for Prohibition and Labor. Edwin C. Piece. Arena. 26 : 128-36. Ag. '01. The Curse of Inebriety. R. Osgood. Arena. 26:136-40. Ag. '01. Magnitude of the Liquor Traffic. Robert M. Rabb. Arena. 40:325-30. O. '08. The March of Temperance. Pere G. Wallmo. Atlantic Monthly. 79: 177-89. F. '97. A Study of American Liquor Laws. Charles W. Eliot. Atlantic Monthly. 101 : 627-34. My. '08. Prohibition in the South. Frank Foxcroft. Atlantic Monthly. 115: 735-47. Je. '15. Nation-wide Prohibition. L. Ames Brown. Bulletin of Iowa State Institutions. 6:156-88. Ap. '04. Alco- holism. L. G. Kinne. Century Magazine. 27 : 792-4. Mr. '84. The Temperance Ques- tion. (Symposium.) Century Magazine. 33 : 490-2. Ja. '87. How Prohibition Grows. Century Magazine. 76 : 462-6. Jl. '07. The South and the Saloon. William G. Brown. Century Magazine. 81 : 39-45. N. '10. The Advance of the Water Wagon. Henry S. Williams. Charities and the Commons. 19 : 1441-2. Ja. 25, '08. The On- slaught on the Saloon. Charities and the Commons. 19 : 1452-3. Ja. 25, '08. Local Option and State Prohibition in the South. A. J. McKelway. Charities and the Commons. 19 : 1604-6. F. 15, '08. Prohibition in North Dakota. Charles A. Pollock. BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxi Charities and the Commons. 20 : 154. My. 2, '08. Prohibition and Southern Local Problems. Francis H. McLean. Chautauquan. 36 : 355. Ja. '03. Will Prohibition Be Abandoned ? Chautauquan. 37:11. Ap. '03. State Prohibition Discarded by Vermont. Chautauquan. 50:336-8. My. '08. Prohibition and Interstate Commerce. Collier's. 40: n. N. 2, '07. The Spread of Temperance. Collier's. 40:5. Ja. 18. '08. The Brewers of Ohio. (Ed.) Collier's. 40:7. F. 8, '08. Entente Cordiale. (Ed.) Collier's. 40:10-3. F. 29, '08. The City Saloon and Vicious Politics. Will Irwin. Collier's. 41 : 13-5. Mr. 28, '08. South Carolina's Substitute and How She Fared Worse. Will Irwin. Collier's. 41 : 16-7. Ap. 4, '08. South Carolina's Substitute and How She Fared Worse. Will Irwin. Collier's. 41 : 9-11. My. 9, '08. The Texas "Clean-Up" from Within. Will Irwin. Collier's. 41:9-10. My. 16, '08. The Model License League. Will Irwin. Collier's. 42:27-8. Mr. 13, '09. Tainted News Methods of the Liquor Interests. Will Irwin. Collier's. 49 : 10-1 and 37. S. 7, '12. A Mystery Unravelled. Collier's. 50:6. D. 21, '12. The Root of Evil. (Ed.) Collier's. 52 : 12. D. 13, '13. John Barleycorn. Commoner. 15 : 1. Ja. '15. National Prohibition in Congress. William J. Bryan. Conference for Good City Government. (Pittsburgh.) N. '08. PP- 49-72. Discussion. pp. 421-43. The Liquor Traffic and City Government, A. R. Hatton. Contemporary Review. 85 : 413-29. Mr. '04. Alcoholic Beverages. and Longevity. Thomas P. Whittaker. Contemporary Review. 94:510-1. O. '08. Finland's Prohibitive Bill Contemporary Review. 94-511-2. O. '08. Prohibition and Inter- national Treaties. E. J. Dillon. Contemporary Review. 104:548-56. O. '13. A Neglected Phase of Temperance Reform. Robert B. Batty. Contemporary Review. 107 : 695-704. Je. '15. The Drink Trade and State Purchase. Thomas P. Whittaker. Cosmopolitan. 44:492-6. Ap. '08. Prohibition Sentiment and xxxii BIBLIOGRAPHY Recent Legislative Enactment in this Country. Arthur Bris- bane. Cosmopolitan. 44 : 549-54. My. '08. World-wide Significance of the Movement. Arthur Brisbane. Current Literature. 44 : 347-50. Ap. '08. The Prohibition Tidal Wave. Current Opinion. 56: 334-6. My. '14. The Secretary of the Navy Fires a Broadside at John Barleycorn. Delineator. 75 : 36 and 68. Ja. '10. Gone Dry. Minnie J. Reynolds. Dublin Review. 85 : 1-32. Jl. '79. The Liquor Traffic, Should It Be Prohibited? Thomas P. Whittaker. Everybody's Magazine. 30:654-9. My. '14. Rum What the Or- ganized Pros and Cons Would Do about It. (Symposium.) Everybody's Magazine. 30: 798-805. Je. '14. (Symposium, letters.) Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 127-30. Jl. '14. Concerning Rum and Modern Industrialism. Gordon Thayer. Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 131-5. Jl. '14. Facts in the Souls of Men. George T. Ladd. Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 273-5. Ag. '14. Facts about Distilled Rum. Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 278-80. Ag. '14. The Woman's Side. *Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 383-8. S. '14. Rum and Remedies. Isaac Fisher. Everybody's Magazine. 32:653. My. '15. The Full Dinner-Pail Takes a Crack at the Flowing Bowl in Lansing, Mich. Forum. 31 : 209-12. Ap. 'oo. Prohibition in Kansas. W. A. Peffer. fHampton's Magazine. 27: 341-54. S. 'n. The Battle for Booze. A. H. Gleason. Harper's Monthly. 101 : 850-8. N. 'oo. Alcohol Physiology and Temperance Reform. W. O. Atwater. Harper's Weekly. 46:511. Ap. 19, '02. Work of the Prohi- bitionists. Harper's Weekly. 51 : 1057. Jl. 20, '07. The Dry Days in the South. Edward Lissner. Harper's Weekly. 53:29. Jl. 17, '09. The Truth about Pro- hibition in Maine. Independent. 36 : 849. Jl. 3, '84. Prohibition in Iowa. Independent. 63:442-4. Ag. 22, '07. Prohibition in Georgia. Lovick P. Winter. BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxiii Independent. 63:564-7. S. 5, '07. The Growth of Prohibition and Local Option. J. Fanning O'Reilly. Independent 66:222. F. 4, '09. The Prohibition Movement in New Zealand. Independent. 67: 168-78. Jl. 22, '09. Does Prohibition Prohibit? (Symposium.) Independent. 70:133. Ja. 19, 'u. Our Consumption of Intoxi- cants. William B. Bailey. Independent 71:658-9. S. 21, *n. Prohibition in Maine. International 4:32-3. Jl. 'n. A Russian Official on American Prohibition. Count Louis Skarzynski. International Journal of Ethics. 9:350-9. Ap. '99. The Ethics of Prohibition. D.-J. Fraser. Literary Digest. 43: 1081-2. D. 9, 'il. The Rising Tide of Drink. Literary Digest. 44 : 106-7. Ja. 20, '12. To Dam the Interstate Flow of Drink. Literary Digest. 45:827-8. N. 9, '12. The Growing Use of Liquor and Tobacco. Literary Digest. 46:60-1. Ja. n, '13. To Keep Dry States Dry. Literary Digest. 46:816-7. Ap. 12, '13. Will the Webb Law Work? Literary Digest. 47 : 803-4. N. I, '13. Keeping Tennessee Dry. Literary Digest. 47:1176-7. D. 13, '13. A Temperance Lesson from Europe. Literary Digest. 48: 196-7. Ja. 31, '14. Bottle vs. Book in Russia. Literary Digest. 49:513-4. S. 19, '14. Prohibition's New Airy. Literary Digest 49 : 579. S. 26, '14. California on Prohibition. Literary Digest. 49:618-9. O. 3, '14. Virginia's Prohibition Stride. Literary Digest. 49 : 965. N. 14, '14. Russia's Vodka-less Army. Literary Digest 49: 1108. D. 5, '14. Democracy's Liquor Prob- lem. Literary Digest. 50 : 8, Ja. 2, '15. Prohibition's Day in Congress. Literary Digest 50: 180-1. Ja. 30, '15. Alabama Dry Again. Literary Digest 50 : 391-2. F. 20, '15. Knocking Vodka Out of Russia. Literary Digest 5o:795- Ap. 10, '15. St George and "the Wagon." Literary Digest 50: 870. Ap. 17, '15. War and Drink at Odds. Literary Digest. 50 : 1084-5. My. 8, '15. France Banishing Absinth. ' * xxxiv BIBLIOGRAPHY Literary Digest. 50 : 1278-9. My. 29, '15. England's Wavering With Drink. *Literary Digest. 51 : 246. Ag. 7, '15. Liquors no Longer Drugs. Living Age. 284: 119-22. Ja. 9, '15. Drink. fMcClure's. 31 : 704-12. O. '08. Alcohol and the Individual. Henry S. Williams. fMcClure's. 32 : 154-61. D. '08. Alcohol and the Community. Henry S. Williams. McClure's. 32:557-66. Mr. '09. Evidence Against Alcohol. M. A. Rosanoff and A. J. Rosanoff. National Municipal Review. 3 : 505-16. Jl. '14. Some Aspects of the Liquor Problem. John Koren. New England Magazine. 45 : 81-8. F. '12. The Prohibition Crisis in Maine. Robert J. Sprague. Nineteenth Century. 37:709-18. My. '95. An Object Lesson in Prohibition. T. C. Down. Nineteenth Century. 67: 1008-25. Je. 'ib. Alcohol and the Afri- can. Leslie Probyn. Nineteenth Century. 77 : 401-8. F. '15. Temperance Reform in Russia. G. H. Frodsham. Nineteenth Century. 77: 1004-14. My. '15. Drink and the War. D. C. Lathbury. North American Review. 135 : 525-35. D. '82. Constitutional Prohibition in Iowa. Buren R. Sherman. North American Review. 141 : 34-46. Jl. '85. Prohibition in Practice. Gail Hamilton: North American Review. 156:586-93. My. '03, Possible Refor- mation of the Drink Traffic. W. S. Rainsford. North American Review. 190:628-41. N. '09. Local Option and -After. R. E. Macnaghten. Outlook. 67 : 369-72. F; 9, '01. The Temperance Question. (Symposium.) Outlook. 70:115-6. Ja. u, '02. Two Temperance Experiments. Outlook. 70:120-4. Ja. n, '02. Results of the Russian Liquor Reform. George Kennan. Outlook. 72:678-83. N. 22, '02. Temperance Reform, the Diffi- culties with Current Methods. W. O. Atwater. fOutlook. 72 : 732-7. N. 29, '02. Temperance Reform ; Con- structive Measures, a Platform and a Program. W. O. Atwater. Outlook. 73:868-73. Ap. n, '03. Prohibition Pro ; and Con. (Symposium.) BIBLIOGRAPHY Outlook 74:981-4. Ag. 22, '03. How Prohibition Works in Kansas. C. H. Matson. Outlook. 86:757-8. Ag. 10, '07. Prohibition in Georgia. (Ed.) Outlook. 86:947-9. Ag. 31, '07. State Prohibition in Georgia and the South. A. J. McKelway. Outlook. 87:313-4. O. 12, '07. About Prohibition. B. H. Bowler. Outlook. 87 : 207. N. 30, '07. Prohibition in Alabama. (Ed.) Outlook. 88:9-10. Ja. 4, '08. Preparations for Prohibition. (Ed.) Outlook. 88:384-5. F. 22, '08. The Saloon on the Defensive. (Ed.) Outlook. 88 : 581-2. Mr. 14, '08. The Saloon in the South. Outlook. 88:615. Mr. 21, '08. State Prohibition and the Na- tional Law. (Ed.) Outlook. 98:771-3. Ag. 5, 'n. Does Prohibition Prohibit L. J. Abbott. Outlook 99:51. S. 2, 'u. Prohibition in Maine. Henry M. Pringle. Outlook 99:693. N. 25, f u. Prohibition in Maine. (Ed.) Outlook 103:21-3. Ja. 4, '13. Uncle Sam and State Liquor Laws. Outlook 105 : 542-3. N. 8, '13. Alcohol vs. Publicity. Outlook. 106:49-50. Ja. 3, '14. The Liquor Traffic a National Problem. Outlook 106 : 566-7. Mr. 14, '14. A Confession, Not a Charge. (Ed.) Outlook 107 : 8-9. My. 2, '14. Dry Goods in Dry Towns. Outlook 107:519. Jl. 4, '14. Confiscation and Compensation. Outlook 107 : 644. JL 18, '14. National Prohibition and a Con- stitutional Amendment Outlook. 107 : 686. JL 25, '14. Prohibition in Kansas. Outlook 107:856-61. Ag. 8, '14. Industry vs. Alcohol. Lewis D. Theiss. Outlook 109 : 371-4. F. 17, '15. Lights and Shades of Russian Prohibition. George Kennan. Reformed Quarterly Review. 30 : 140-77. Ap. "83. Prohibitory Temperance Legislation. J. Spangler Kieffer. Review of Reviews. 23:259-62. Mr. '01. The Rise of Prohi- bition. (Ed.) Review of Reviews. 36:328-35. S. '07. The Prohibition Wave in the South. John Comgan. xxxvi BIBLIOGRAPHY fReview of Reviews. 37 : 468-76. Ap. '08. The Nation's Anti- Drink Crusade. Ferdinand C. Iglehart. fReview of Reviews. 39 : 601-4. My. '09. Another Year of De- feat for the American Saloon. Ferdinand C. Iglehart. fReview of Reviews. 43:215-8. F. 'n. Voting Out the Liquor Traffic. Ferdinand C. Iglehart. fReview of Reviews. 48:79-83. Jl. '13. The Campaign Against the Saloon. Ferdinand C. Iglehart. fReview of Reviews. 51 : 215-6. F. '15. The War Against the Saloon. Ferdinand C. Iglehart. Review of Reviews. 51 : 521-5. My. '15. Alcohol, the Pressing Issue. (Ed.) Review of Reviews. 51 : 578. My. '15. Prohibition in Canada. J. P. Gerrie. Saturday Evening Post. 187:3-5; 29. F. 13, '15. A Nation (Russia) on the Water Wagon. Mary I. Brush. Sunset Magazine. 33 : 1082-4. D. '14. A Knockout Blow for Booze. Westminster Review. 171 : 578-80. My. '09. The Question of Today. World Today. 9 : 1340-3. D. '05. The Enforcement Commission of Maine. Charles E. Owen. World Today. 19: 1164-5. O. '10. Enforced Sobriety. Avery N. Beebe. World's Work. 16: 10303-4. Je. '08. Will Prohibition Fail Again? World's Work. 26 : 703-12. O. '13. The Church Militant Against the Saloon. Frank P. Stockbridge. World's Work. 30:433-7. Ag. '15. What Lloyd George Accom- plished against Liquor. Harry Jones. World's Work. 30:438-40. Ag. '15. Prohibition in Russia. Stephen Graham. AFFIRMATIVE REFERENCES Books and Pamphlets Allen, Martha M. Alcohol a Dangerous and Unnecessary Medicine. National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. 1000. fAnti- Saloon League. Year Book. (Annual.) American Issue Publishing Co., Westerville, O. BIBLIOGRAPHY Armstrong, Lebbeus. The Temperance Reform. Fowler & Wells. 1853- Arthur, Timothy S. Grappling with the Monster. Artman, Samuel R. The Legalized Outlaw. Levey Bros. & Co. 1908. Banks, Louis A. The Saloonkeepers' Ledger. Funk & Wag- nails. 1895. Blair, Henry W. The Temperance Movement Wm. E. Smythe Co. 1888. *Bliss, W. D. P., ed. The New Encyclopedia of Social Reform. Funk & Wagnalls. 1908. Article on Prohibition, pp. 966-75, by W. P. F. Ferguson. Chapman, Irvin S. Particeps Criminis The Story of a Cali- fornia Rabbit Drive. Revell 1910. Chicago, Vice Commission of. The Social Evil in Chicago. 1911. Chap. 2, pp. 119-40. The Social Evil and the Saloon. Church of England Temperance Society. Modern Medical Opinions of Alcohol Condit, Filmore. The Relation of Saloons to Insanity. Ameri- can Issue Publishing Co. Crafts, Dr. and Mrs. Wilbur F. World Book of Temperance. International Reform Bureau. 1908. Crooker, Joseph H. Shall I Drink? Pilgrim Press. 1914. Davis, Edith S. A Compendium of Temperance Truth. Na- tional Woman's Christian Temperance Union. 1915. Dorchester, Daniel The Liquor Problem in All Ages. Phillips & Hunt 1884. fFehlandt, August F. A Century of Drink Reform in the United States. Jennings & Graham, Cincinnati 1904. Finch, John B. The People vs. the Liquor Traffic. Good Templars, Mauston, Wis. 1888. Gordon, Ernest The Anti-Alcohol Movement in Europe. Revell 1913. Hammell, George M., ed. The Passing of the Saloon. Tower Press. 1908. Hanly, J. Frank, and Stewart, Oliver W. Speeches of the Flying Squadron. Indianapolis, 1915. Hayler, Guy. Prohibition Advance in All Lands. American Issue Co. 1914. Hopkins, Alphonso A. Profit and Loss in Man. Funk & Wagnalls. 1909, xxxviii BIBLIOGRAPHY fHopkins, Alphonso A. Wealth and Waste. Funk & Wagnalls. 1895. Lilly, Lemuel D. Bench vs. Bar. American Issue Publishing Co. 1910. Lilly, Lemuel D. The Saloon before the Courts. Ohio Anti- Saloon League, Columbus. *Minnesota, University of. Agricultural Experiment Station. Bulletin 116. May, 1909. pp. 32-5. The Relation of the Liquor Traffic to Agriculture in Northeastern Minnesota. A. J. McGuire. fNational Prohibition Committee. American Prohibition Year Book. (Annual.) Chicago. National Temperance Society and Publication House. Annual Reports. New York City. National Temperance Society and Publication House. The Pro- hibitionists' Text Book. New York. 1883. Oswald, Felix L. The Poison Problem of the Cause and Cure of Intemperance. Appleton. 1887. Pittman, Robert C. Alcohol and the State. National Tem- perance Society and Publication House. 1883. Powell, Frederick. Bacchus Dethroned. National Temperance Society and Publication House, New York. 1873. Reid, William, ed. The Temperance Cyclopedia. The Scot- tish Temperance League, Glasgow. 1882. Richardson, Benjamin W. The Temperance Lesson Book. Na- tional Temperance Society and Publication House. 1888. Schoff, Hannah K. The Wayward Child a Study in the Causes of Crime. Bobbs. 1915. Chap. 10, pp. 137-57. The Saloon's Part in the Downfall of Youth. Scientific Temperance Federation. The Effect of Alcoholic Drink Upon the Human Mind and Body. American Issue Publishing Co. 1913. Stoddard, Cora F. Alcohol's Ledger in Industry. American Issue Publishing Co. 1914. tStoddard, Cora F. Handbook of Modern Facts About Alcohol. American Issue Publishing Co. 1914. Stoddard, Cora F., and Transeau, E. L. Alcohol in Every Day Life. Stubbs, W. R. Prohibition in Kansas. American Issue Pub- lishing Co. 1910. fWarner, Harry S. Social Welfare and the Liquor Problem. Intercollegiate Prohibition Association, Chicago. 1909. BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxix * Wisconsin. Report and Recommendations of the Wisconsin Legislative Committee to Investigate the White Slave Traffic and Kindred Subjects, pp. 98-103. Madison. 1914. Woolley, John G. Federal Prohibition as Applied to the Terri- tory of Hawaii. American Issue Publishing Co. 1911. Woolley, John G. The Liquor Problem to Date. American Issue Publishing Co. 1913. Woolley, John G. The Wounds of a Friend. American Issue Publishing Co. Woolley, John G., and Johnson, William E. Temperance Prog- ress in the Century. Linscott. 1903. Magazine Articles Andover Review. 1 : 510-6. My. '84. Prohibition in Kansas. James G. Dougherty. Andover Review. 9:23-9. Ja. '88. Prohibition in the Light of New Issues. William J. Tucker. Annals of the American Academy. 2 : 59-68. JL '91. The Eco- nomic Basis of Prohibition. Simon N. Patten. Arena. 36 : 168-73. Ag. '06. Shall Prohibition Be Given a Fair Trial. Finley C. Hendrickson. fArena. 38 : 610-9. D. '07. One Hundred Years' Battle with the Poison Trust. Charles R. Jones. Biblical World. 43:262-4. Ap. '14. Alcoholic Liquors and Tobacco. Catholic World. 47 : 539-44. Jl. '88. Liquor and Labor. John T. Smith. Catholic World. 96 : 774-87. Mr. '13. The Political Economy of Alcohol. Frank O'Hara. Century. 90 : 50-6. My. '15. War and Drink. James D. Whelpley. Charities and the Commons. 20 : 695-6. S. 19, '08. Better America Inspired or America Sober? (Ed.) Charities and the Commons. 20 : 705-8. S. 19, '08. The Social Basis of Prohibition. Simon N. Patten. Chautauquan. 9 : 525-7. Je. '89. The Relation of Rum to Crime. A. B. Richmond. Chautauquan. 51 : 96-107. Je. '08. Economics of the Drink Traffic. George B. Waldrott. Collier's. 39:7. Ag. 24, '07. Prohibition. (Ed.) Collier's. 42 : 5-6. Ja. 9, '09. Progress of Prohibition. (Ed.) Collier's. 50:6. F. 22, '13. The Root of all Evil. (Ed.) xl BIBLIOGRAPHY Collier's. 50 : 14. Ja. 18, '13. Why the South Demands Prohi- bition. Collier's. 50 : 14. F. I, '13. A Typical Example. Mark Sullivan. Collier's. 51:32. My. 31, '13. Some Aspects of Prohibition in the South. P. H. Whaley, Jr. Collier's. 53:6. Je. 27, '14. A Town with a Lid. Walt Mason. Collier's. 53 : 25. Je. 20, '14. Two States and a Saloon. Collier's. 55: 14. Jl. 3, '15. Wealth and Booze. (Ed.) Commoner. 15 : 3. Ja. '15. States' Rights not Menaced. Wil- liam J. Bryan. Commoner. 15 : 24-5. F. '15. The Booze Business Is on the Run. Commoner. 15 : 30. Mr. '15. Drink Shortens Average Life. Commoner. 15 : 2. Ap. '15. The Drink Bill of the Nations. Commoner. 15 : 24. Ap. '15. The Way to Prohibit Is to Prohibit, Russia Showed. Commoner. 15 : 2. My. '15. The Question of Compensation. William J. Bryan. ^Commoner. 15:67. My. '15. The Case Against Alcohol. Wil- liam J. Bryan. Commoner. 15 : 20. My. '15. Don't Be Bamboozled by Booze. fCongressional Record. 46:1867-73. F. 2, 'n. The Great De- stroyer. Richmond P. Hobson. Congressional Record. 50 : 5897-8. N. 13, '13. Prohibition. Morris Sheppard. Congressional Record. 51 : 615-8. D. 10, '13. Prohibition of the Liquor Traffic. Morris Sheppard and others. *Congressional Record. 52 : 495-616. D. 22, '14. Prohibition De- bate in the House of Representatives on the Hobson Reso- lution. Contemporary Review. 51 : 531-46. Ap. '87. Prohibition in the United States. Alex Gustafson. Cosmopolitan. 45 : 83-90. Je. '08. Georgia Pioneers in the Pro- hibition Crusade. John T. Graves. Current Opinion. 58 : 329-30. Ap. '15. Chasing the "Rum Devil" off the Face of the Earth. Forum. 3 : 39-49. Mr. '87. The Effectiveness of Prohibition. Neal Dow. Forum. 7:673-82. Ag. '89. Prohibition and License. John J. Ingalls. Harper's Weekly. 51 : 1790-1. D. 7, '07. The Rising Tide of Temperance. Charles F. Carter. BIBLIOGRAPHY xli Harper's Weekly. 53 : 6. O. 23, '09. No License in New Hamp- shire. J. H. Robbins. Harper's Weekly. 55:21. My. 13, 'n. Prohibition in the South. E. F. Noel. Harper's Weekly. 55:6. My. 20, 'n. Prohibition Failures. Henry M. Hall. Harper's Weekly. 55: 19. Ag. 5, 'n. Alcohol and the Degenera- tive Diseases : the Deadly Parallel between Our Increasing Consumption of Intoxicants and Heart and Kidney Diseases. Norman E. Ditman. Harper's Weekly. 55 : 6. O. 21, 'u. Liquor and Labor in Maine. G. Wilfred Pearce. Harper's Weekly. 55:6. D. 2, 'n. More about Prohibition in Kansas. E. L. Munson. Harper's Weekly. 56:6. Ja. 6, '12. Prohibition in Kansas. C. Farnsworth. Hibbert Journal. 7:439-41. N. '08. Prof. Flinders Petrie on "Constraint Respecting Liquors." Joseph H. Crooker. Independent. 32 : 1-2. Je. 10, '80. The Maine Law in Maine. Neal Dow. Independent. 33 : 4-5. Mr. 31, '81. The So-called Degeneracy of Maine. Henry S. Burrage. Independent. 34:4. Ag. 24, '82. Prohibition by Constitutional Amendment. Neal Dow. Independent. 35:450-1. Ap. 12, '83. The Liquor Traffic in Maine. Neal Dow. Independent. 35 : 871-4. Jl. 12, '83. National Evils Require National Remedies. H. W. Blair. Independent. 36:321. Mr. 13, '84. Gains of the Temperance Reformation. Daniel Dorchester. Independent. 36 : 325-6. Mr. 13, '84. Constitutional Prohibition. Joseph Cook. Independent. 36:876. Jl. 10, '84. Prohibition. John P. St. John. Independent. 38: 1132-3. S. 9, '86. Prohibition in Cities. Neal Dow. Independent. 42 : 769. Ja. 5, '90. Prohibition in Maine. Albert W. Paine. Independent. 43 : 1591-2. O. 29, '91. The Maine Law in Maine. Neal Dow. xlii BIBLIOGRAPHY {Independent. 60:1033-5. My. 3, '06. What Prohibition Has Done for Kansas. Charles M. Sheldon. Independent. 63 : 709. S. 19, '07. A Plea from a Convict Camp. Independent. 64 : 162-3. Ja. 16, '08. Georgia's Example to the Nation. Independent. 64 : 1304-5. Je. 4, '08. A National Fight for Pro- hibition. Independent. 67:202-3. Jl. 22, '09. Does Prohibition Prohibit? (Ed.) "Independent 75 : 25-6. Jl. 3, '13. What Prohibition Has Done for Kansas. Charles M. Sheldon. *Journal of the American Medical Association. 35 : 65-71. Jl. 14, 'oo. The Relation of Ethyl Alcohol to the Nutrition of the Animal Body. Winfield S. Hall. Journal of Social Science. 14 : 71-89. '81. Prohibitory Legisla- tion. P. Emory Aldrich. Ladies' Home Journal. 28:21 and 62. F. i, 'n. When and Where Prohibition Has Succeeded. Samuel Dickie. Ladies' Home Journal. 32:20. Ja. '15. What Happens when a Town Goes Dry. F. Crissey. Leslie's Weekly. 110:208-9 and 217. Mr. 3, '10. How North Dakota Seeks to Enforce Prohibition. Robert D. Heinl. Leslie's Weekly. 115:106-11. Ag. I, '12. A Wonderful Town of Prosperous Toilers. Edward M. Thierry. Literary Digest. 49: 140-1. Jl. 25, '14. A Convict Plea for Pro- hibition. Literary Digest. 49 : 997-8. N. 21, '14. Prohibition Winning the West. Literary Digest. 49: 1126. D. 5, '14. Russia's Delight in Sobriety. Literary Digest. 50:536. Mr. 13, '15. Number of Dry States Doubled. Methodist Quarterly. 14 : 244-62. Ap. '54. The Prohibitory Liquor Law. Methodist Review. 45 : 277-80. Mr. '85. The Prohibition Move- ment. Munsey's Magazine. 50: 14-21. O. '13. $2,700,000,000 a Year for Liquor and Tobacco. Frank Fayant. Nation. 36 : 168. F. 22, '83. Prohibition in Iowa. Ernest Hof er. Nation. 36 : 272-3. Mr. 29, '83. Prohibition and Sophistry. Henry G. Reynolds. Nation. 48:87-8. Ja. 31, '89. An Experiment in Prohibition. BIBLIOGRAPHY xliii National Educational Association, Proceedings, 1911. pp. 75-82. Temperance and Society. David Starr Jordan. New Englander and Yale Review. 48: 126-9. F. '88. The Differ- ence between Prohibition and High License. William L. Phelps. New Princeton Review. 4 : 191-200. S. '87. Some Plain Words on Prohibition. A. H. Colquitt. North American Review. 134:315-25. Mr. '82. Results of Pro- hibition Legislation. Neal Dow. North American Review. 138 : 50-9. Ja. '84. Alcohol in Politics. Henry W. Blair. fNorth American Review. 139: 179-85. Ag. '84. Prohibition and Persuasion. Neal Dow. North American Review. 143:382-97. O. *86 Prohibition. David R. Locke. fNorth American Review. 147 : 121-49. Ag. *88. Prohibitory Law and Personal Liberty. Neal Dow and others. North American Review. 179:550-4. O. '04. Prohibition, Why? Silas C. Swallow. fNorth American Review. 189:410-5. Mr. '09. Prohibition and Public Morals. Henry Colman. Our Day. 14 : 12-23. Ja. '95. Neal Dow's Watchwords for the Twentieth Century. Joseph Cook. Outlook. 67:742-4. Mr. 30, f oi. Law Enforcement in Kansas. Charles S. Gleed. Outlook. 71 : 707-8. JL 12, '02. Prohibition in Kansas. Outlook. 73:864-8. Ap. ii, '03. Why Prohibitionists are Undis- couraged. Oliver W. Stewart. Outlook. 73 : 596. Mr. 7, '03. The Overthrow of Prohibition in Vermont. H. F. Forrest Outlook. 86:975. Ag. 31, '07. Prohibition in Maine. Lillian M. N. Stevens. Outlook. 88: 102. Ja. ii, '08. A Defense of Maine. Mabel L. H. Weaver. Outlook. 88:587-9. Mr. 14, '08. Prohibition and the Negro. Booker T. Washington. Outlook 89 : 231. My. 30, '08, Prohibition in Kansas. Outlook. 89 : 271-2. Je. 6, '08. State Prohibition in North Caro- lina. Outlook 89: 505-6. Jl. 4, '08. Against the Saloon. xliv BIBLIOGRAPHY Outlook. 89:513-21. Jl. 4, '08. The Temperance Tidal-wave. Samuel J. Barrows. Outlook. 89:557-64. Jl. n, '08. The Temperance Tidal-wave. Samuel J. Barrows. Outlook. 91 : 397-402. F. 20, '09. American Sober. Samuel J. Barrows. Outlook. 97:333-4. F. n, '11. The Conditions in Maine. Lillian M. N. Stevens. Outlook. 98: 799. Ag. 5, 'n. Prohibition in Maine. B. C. Went- worth. Outlook. 99:115-20. S. 16, '12. The Argument for Prohibition. Outlook, 107:529-30. Jl. 4, '14. Partner or Parasite. D. Clar- ence Gibboney. Outlook. 108:875-8 and 87-8. D. 16, '14. Prohibition in Russia. George Kennan. Outlook. 109: 954-5. Ap. 28, '15. Prohibition in Alabama. Outlook. 110:505-8 and 517. Je. 30, '15. Is Moderate Drinking Justified? The Answer of Life Insurance. Samuel Wilson. Pearson's Magazine. 15 : 75-81. Ja. '06. The National Ravages of Alcohol. Rene Bache. Popular Science Monthly. 45 : 225-34. Je. '94- Should Prohibitory Laws Be Abolished? T. D. Crothers. Review of Reviews. 37 : 479-80. Ap. '08. The Moral Dignity of Prohibition in the South. Review of Reviews. 38:91-2. Jl. '08. Does Prohibition Pay? Review of Reviews. 38 : 300-3. S. '08. Prohibitionists and Their Cause. Samuel Dickie. fReview of Reviews. 50:212-6. Ag. '14. Europe's Reaction against Alcoholism. Review of Reviews. 51 : 96-7. Ja. '15. How Russia Has Gone Dry? Reformed Quarterly Review. 32 : 507-24. O. '85. Non-Political Prohibition. Hiram King. fSaturday Evening Post. 187:3-5. Jl. n, '14. How Kansas Boarded the Water Wagon. William Allen White. tSaturday Evening Post. 187:25-7. N. 14, '14. Mr. White Comes Back. William Allen White. Saturday Evening Post. 188: 14-5; 41-2. S. 4, '15. Moisture A Trace. Samuel G. Blythe. Spectator. 1 14 : 464-5. Ap. 3, '15. Why Do the Government Hesitate? BIBLIOGRAPHY xlv Spectator. 114:496-7. Ap. 10, '15. The Great Opportunity. Sunset. 33:690-2. O. '14. State- Wide Prohibition in California. S. W. OdelL Survey. 22 : 7-8. Ap. 3, '09. Prohibition in Massachusetts. Survey. 30:448-9. Jl. 5, '13. For Thinkers, Not Drinkers. Survey. 33:327-8. D. 26, '14. Eye-witness of Russia's Prohi- bition. Survey. 34:3-4. Ap. 3, '15. The English Press on War and Alcohol. Technical World. 21:8-12. Mr. '14. Strong Drink. Elbert Hubbard. tTechnical World. 22:648-55 and 782. Ja. '15. The Worker Who Drinks Must Go. Gene and Willard Price. Universalist Quarterly. 43 : 218-25. Ap. '86. Prohibition and the Constitution. S. P. Smith. West Virginia Medical Journal 7:260-4. F. '13. Alcohol and Heredity. C. C. Wholey. World Today. 15 : 1257-^0. D. '08. The Modern Temperance Movement James K. Shields. fWorld Today. 18 : 167-70. F. '10. Prohibition in Alabama. Robert G. Hidden. World's Work. 30:197-204. Je. '15. A Saloonless Nation by 1920. John S. Gregory. World's Work. 30:205-12. Je. f i A Teetotal War. James Middleton. The following papers are devoted very largely to die support of Prohibition or Temperance. In most cases their files will be found to contain much information of value to debaters: American Issue. (Weekly.) Anti-Saloon League, Westerville, O. American Patriot (Monthly.) Anti- Saloon League, Wester- ville, O. California Voice. (Weekly.) Corner Second and Spring Streets, Los Angeles, Cal. Catholic Temperance Advocate. (Monthly.) Catholic Total Abstinence Union of America, 804 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, IIL Golden Age. (Weekly.) 224 Brown-Randolph Building, Atlanta, Ga. Illinois Banner. (Weekly.) 32 South Vermiflion Street, Dan- ville, IE xlvi BIBLIOGRAPHY Index. (Monthly.) Williamsport, Pa. Intercollegiate Statesman. (Monthly.) Intercollegiate Prohi- bition Association, 189 West Madison Street, Chicago, 111. National Advocate. (Monthly.) The National Temperance So- ciety, 373 Fourth Avenue, New York City. National Daily. (Daily.) The Anti- Saloon League, Wester- ville, O. New Republic. (Weekly.) The Anti-Saloon League, Wester- ville, O. Pacific Patriot. (Monthly.) 414 Behnke- Walker Building, Port- land, Ore. Scientific Temperance Journal. (Monthly.) Scientific Temper- ance Federation, 23 Trull Street, Boston, Mass. Temperance Educational Quarterly. (Quarterly.) National Women's Christian Temperance Union, Hartford, Wis. Union Signal. (Weekly.) National Women's Christian Tem- perance Union, Evanston, 111. Vindicator. (Weekly.) 1252 Liberty Street, Franklin, Pa. The Vindicator is perhaps the best of these for the debater. Water Lily. (Monthly.) The National Temperance Society, 373 Fourth Avenue, New York City. Wheeling Advance. (Weekly.) 3021 Union Street, Bellaire, O. Youth's Temperance Banner. (Monthly.) National Temper- ance Society, 373 Fourth Avenue, New York City. A number of other papers advocating Prohibition are named on page 8 of the 1915 Prohibition Year Book. NEGATIVE REFERENCES . Books and Pamphlets Benton, John C. The Legal Aspect of Prohibition. Geo. A. Pierce Co. 1909. Davis, Cyrus W., and Cabell, Royal E. The Two Banner Pro- hibition States. National Home Rule Association. Cincinnati. Day, Holman. The Ramrodders. Harper. 1910. Debar, Joseph, ed. Prohibition; Its Relation to Temperance, Good Morals, and Sound Government. Cincinnati. 1910. Freeman, James E. If Not the Saloon, What? Baker & Taylor Co. 1903. BIBLIOGRAPHY xlvii Gunn, Robert A. The Truth about Alcohol Belford, Clark & Co. 1887. Homan, J. A. Prohibition, the Enemy of Temperance. The Christian Liberty Bureau, Cincinnati. 1910. Hillier, Sydney. Popular Drugs, Their Use and Abuse. T. Werner Laurie. London. Lewis, Dio. Prohibition a Failure. Fowler & Wells. 1892. McCarthy, Justin. Prohibitory Legislation in the United States. Tinsley Bros. 1872. McKenzie, Fred A. Sober by Act of Parliament Swan, Son- nenschein & Co. London. 1896. Magruder, C. S. Anti- Saloon Campaign Manual Reproduced and Answered. Liberal Advocate. 1915. Martin, Jason. The Fallacy of Prohibition. Iconoclast Pub- lishing Co. *Massachusetts, Report of the Commission to Investigate Drunk- enness in. Wright & Potter Printing Co. 1914. Merchants' and Manufacturers' Association of New Jersey. A Cabinet of Facts and Figures. fMonahan, M., ed. A Text Book of True Temperance. United States Brewers' Association. 1911. *Munsterberg, Hugo. American Problems. Moffat, Yard. 1910. Chap. 4, pp. 69-100. Prohibition and Temperance. National Wholesale Liquor Dealers' Association of America. The Anti-Prohibition Manual Cincinnati. 1915. Nordhoff, Charles. Politics for Young Americans. American Book Co. 1875. Chap. 31, pp. 110-3. Of Prohibitory Laws, So-Called. Ohio Home Rule Association. Home Rule or Prohibition. Cincinnati. 1914. *6hio Home Rule Association- Ohio Home Rule Almanac. Cincinnati. 1915. Paget, James, ed. The Alcohol Question. Strahan & Co. Park, Robert. The Case for Alcohol or the Action of Alcohol on Body and Soul. Rebman. 1909. Philadelphia Lager Beer Brewers' Association. Facts vs. Fal- lacies. Bloomingdale-Weiler Advertising Agency. 1915. Reid, G. Archdall Alcoholism, a Study in Heredity; Wm. Wood & Co. 1902. Roberts, John E. The Perils of Reform. Manufacturers' and Dealers' Association of America. xlviii BIBLIOGRAPHY Starke, J. Alcohol the Sanction for Its Use. Putnam. 1907. *Taft, Wm. H. Four Aspects of Civic Duty. pp. 46-8. Scrib- ner. 1908. Thomann, Gallus. Real and Imaginary Effects of Intemper- ance. United States Brewers' Association. 1884. United States Brewers' Association. Alcoholic Patent Medicines and Extracts. New York. 1915. fUnited States Brewers' Association. Year Book (Annual.) 50 Union Square, New York City. Wasson, E. A. Religion and Drink. Burr Printing House. 1914. Weeden, William B. The Morality of Prohibitory Liquor Laws. Roberts Bros. 1875. ^Williams, Edward H. The Question of Alcohol. The Good- hue Co. 1914. Ziegler, G. A., Rommell, W. E., and Herz, George. Prohi- bition and Anti-Prohibition. Broadway Publishing Co. 1911. Magazine Articles American Federationist. 22:347-51. My. '15. The Real Cause of Industrial Accidents. Gustavus Myers. Andover Review. 9 : 18-23. Ja. '88. The Mistake of Prohibition. S. B. Pettengill. Appleton's Magazine. 13 : 180-8. F. '09. Maine Faces Bitter Facts. Holman Day. Appleton's Magazine. 13:311-7. Mr. '09. Christianity and Tem- perance. Charles F. Aked. Arena. 39:315-8. Mr. '08. Sixty Years' Futile Battle of Legisla- tion with Drink. Philip Rappaport. Arena. 40 : 77-9. Jl. '08. Prohibition in Maine and Savings Banks in Ohio. L. B. Hillis. Atlantic Monthly. 95 : 302-8. Mr.. '05. The Drift away from Prohibition. Frank Foxcroft. fCentury Magazine. 27 : 316-8. D. '83. Hurricane Reform. Washington Gladden. tCentury Magazine. 28 : 149-50. My. '84. Comment. Washing- ton Gladden. Charities and the Commons. 19 : 1603-4. F. 15. '08. The Brew- ers' Position. Hugh F. Fox. Charities and the Commons. 20 : 682. S. 5,' '08. Give the Brew- ers a Chance. L. Henry Schwab. BIBLIOGRAPHY xlix Collier's. 48:20. O. 7, 'n. Kitchen Bars, the Secret of the Confusion in Maine. Arthur H. Gleason. Collier's. 51 : 29. Ap. 19, 13. Temperance and Prohibition. T. M. Gilmore. ^Congressional Record. 42 : 5380-1. Ap. 28, '08. The Personal Rights and Liberties of Man. Herman P. Goebel. ^Congressional Record. 52 : 495-616. D. 22, '14. Prohibition De- bate in the House on the Hobson Resolution. Cosmopolitan. 44 : 558-60. My. '08. Temperance or Prohibition. Gustave Pabst Current Literature. 44 : 304. Mr. '08. A Christian Minister's Defense of Strong Drink. Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 135-7. JL *I4- Common-sense Tem- perance. James Samuel. Everybody's Magazine. 31 : 275-8. Ag. '14. Prohibition from the Medical Viewpoint. E. H. Williams. Fortnightly Review. 16: 166-79. Ag. '71. Prohibitory Legislation in the United States. Justin McCarthy. Forum. 2 : 232-42. N. '86. Prohibition, So-called. Leonard W. Bacon. Forum. 2 : 401-10. D. 86. The Alternative of Prohibition. Leonard W. Bacon. Forum. 3:152-60. Mr. '87. Do We Need Prohibition? John Snyder. Harper's Weekly. 51 : 4. S. 23, '11. Maine and Prohibition. (Ed.) Harper's Weekly. 52:9. F. i, '08. The Liquor Men's License Law. Stanley Bronner. Harper's Weekly. 52:6-7. Ap. 25, '08. The Fight Against Alcohol. Harper's Weekly. 53 : 14-5. F. 6, '09. Maine's Mockery of Pro- hibition. Holman Day. Harper's Weekly. 53 : 24-5. F. 27, '09. Maine's Mockery of Pro- hibition. Holman Day. Harper's Weekly. 53:27. My. 29, '09. Beating Prohibition on the Mississippi. Raymond S. Spears. Harper's Weekly. 53 : 13. Je. 19, '09. Liquor and Common Sense in Iowa. William R. Boyd. Harper's Weekly. : 53 : 15. JL 10, '09. Near Prohibition in the South. R. W. Simpson, Jr. Harper's Weekly. 53:16-7. S. 18, '09. New Hampshire's No License Farce. Edward J. Gallagher. 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY Harper's Weekly. 54:9-10. D. 24, '10. A Few Facts about Kansas. I. T. Martin. Harper's Weekly. 55:12-3. Mr. 18, 'n. The Failure of Pro- hibition in the South. R. E. Pritchard. Harper's Weekly. 55:9-10. O. 7, 'u. The Muddle in Maine. Holman Day. Hibbert Journal. 6 : 782-95. Jl. '08. The Right to Constrain Men for Their Own Good. W. M. Flinders Petrie. Independent. 32 : 5. My. 6, '80. Perplexing News from Maine. Independent. 32 : I. My. 27, '80. Joke no Joke. Leonard W. Bacon. Independent. 53 : 430-2. F. 21, '01. Kansas Prohibition Status. Charles M. Harger. {Independent. 81 : 6. Ja. 4, '15. The Control of the Liquor Traffic. (Ed.) Journal of Social Science. 14: 118-28 (1881). Considerations in Favor of License Laws for Restraining the Liquor Traffic. Leonard W. Bacon. fLadies' Home Journal. 28:21; 41. Ja. I, 'n. Why Prohibition Has not Remedied the Liquor Evil and Cannot Do so. Henry S. Williams. Lancet-Clinic. 112:421-7. O. 17, '14. Facts vs. Fanaticism. Ralph Reed. Leslie's Weekly. 109:632 and 7. D. 23, '09. Alabama's Fierce Struggle over Prohibition. S. Mays Ball. Leslie's Weekly. 109 : 652. D. 30, '09. Alabama's Fierce Struggle Over Prohibition. S. Mays Ball. Leslie's Weekly, no: 134. F. 10, '10. Georgia's Attempt to Be Good and Dry. S. Mays Ball. Leslie's Weekly, no: 156 and 68. F. 17, '10. Georgia's Attempt to Be Good and Dry. S. Mays Ball. Leslie's Weekly, no: 540-1 and 51. Je. 2, '10. The Confessions of a Brewer. Percy Andrae. Leslie's Weekly. 119:466 and 81. N. 12, '14. Facts about Kansas on the Water Wagon. Royal E. Cabell. Leslie's Weekly. 121 : 271. S. 9, '15. Are We Intemperate. Joel Shomaker. Literary Digest. 50:675-6. Mr. 27, '15. Liquor Views of the Prohibition Wave. Literary Digest. 51:67-8. Jl. 10, '15. Difficulties with Pro- hibition in Russia. BIBLIOGRAPHY H *McClure's. 31:438-44. Ag. '08. Prohibition and Social Psy- chology. Hugo Munsterberg. McClure's. 32:419-26. F. '09. The Scientific Solution of the Liquor Problem. Henry S. Williams. tMacmillan's Magazine. 59:338-49. Mr. '89. Prohibition in Canada and the United States. Goldwin Smith. Medical Record. 85:247-9. F. 7, '14, The Drug Menace in the South. Dr. Edward H. Williams. Municipal Affairs. 4:399-401. Je. 'oo. The Salon in Politics, Bolton Hall. Nation. 12:353-5. My. 25, '71. Why We Do not Believe in Prohibition- Nation. 36: 168-9, F. 22, '83. Moral Suasion. E. H. Finlayson. Nation. 42 : 52. Ja. 21, '86. Prohibition vs. High License. Nation. 44 : 266. Mr. 31, '87. Taxed and Untaxed Liquor. Nation. 46 : 70-1. Ja. 26, '88. Prohibition and High License. Nation. 48 : 133-4. F. 14, '89. Another Prohibition Experiment. Nation. 49:470. D. 12, '89. Law vs. Moral Suasion. Nation. 55 : 65-6. JL 28, '92. Prohibition in Maine. Nation. 62 : 50-1. Ja. 16, '96. Prohibition in Maine. William MacDonald. Nation. 71 : 224-5. S. 20, 'oo. The Prohibition Episode in Maine. Nation. 75 : 395-6. N. 20, '02. Aspects of Local Option. Nation. 76:409-10. My. 21, '03. Abandoning Prohibition. Nation. 85 : 460-1. N. 21, '07. The War on the Saloon. New Englander and Yale Review. 44 : 706-20. S. '85. Prohibition not Desirable. Fisk P. Brewer. New Englander and Yale Review. 51 : 401-10. D. *89. The Moral of the Prohibitionists's Defeat. Leonard W. Bacon. New Princeton Review. 4:31-43. JL *87. The Theory of Pro- hibition. Sanford H. Cobb. Nineteenth Century. 28:23-38. Jl. '90. Compensation or Con- fiscation. T. W. Russell Nineteenth Century. 65:994-1004. Je. '09. The Future of the Public House. Edwyn Barclay. Nineteenth Century. 71:730-40. Ap. '12. The True Lines of Temperance Reform. F. E. Smith Nineteenth Century. 73 : 1294-1306. Je. '13. Sober by Act of Parliament. Edith Sellers. North American Review. 139 : 185-98. Ag. '84. Prohibition and Persuasion. Dio Lewis. Hi BIBLIOGRAPHY North American Review. 188 : 910-7. D. '08. Some Salient Points of Prohibition in the Light of Christian Ethics. P. Gavan Duffy. North American Review. 201 : 463-5. Mr. '15. Does Prohibition Prohibit? J. M. Gilmore. Overland. 52 : 557-61. D. '08. In the Wake of the Fanatic. Francis H. Robinson. Overland. 53 : 39-42. Ja. '09. The Liquor Problem. T. M. Gil- more. Overland. 53 : 424-8. My. '09. A Glance at the Liquor Problem. Hartwell J. Davis. Outlook. 65 : 675-6. Jl. 21, 'oo. Sensible Temperance. Outlook. 66: 100-1. S. 8, 'oo. Concerning Temperance. Outlook. 73:367. F. 14, '03. Vermont for Local Option. (Ed.) Outlook. 73 : 415. F. 21, '03. Prohibition and Law Enforcement in Maine. Outlook. 73 : 699. Mr. 28, '03. New Hampshire Abandons Pro- hibition. Outlook. 73 : 705-6. Mr. 28, '03. The Liquor Interests and Home Rule. fOutlook. 73:857-9. Ap. n, '03. Prohibition or Temperance Which? Outlook. 86:943-4. Ag. 31, '07. The South and Liquor Selling. Outlook. 98: 763-5. Ag. 5, 'n. State- wide Prohibition. Outlook. 101 : 639-43. Jl. 20, '12. When Prohibition Fails and Why. E. E. Miller. Outlook. 105 : 786-8. D. 13, '13. The Liquor Traffic, Local Option and Slavery. Outlook. 107:531-2. Jl. 4, '14. Prohibition without Compensa- tion : A Reply. Fred G. Betts. Outlook. 108:973. D. 30, '14. Prohibition and Congress. Pearson's Magazine. 22 : 143-53. Ag. '09. Prohibition, the Ob- stacle to Real Reform. William A. Wasson. Popular Science Monthly. 21:785-7. O. '82. The Utility of Drunkenness. W. Mattieu Williams. Popular Science Monthly. 25 : 47-9. My. '84. An Experiment in Prohibition. Edward Johnson. Popular Science Monthly. 26 : 787-96. Ap. '85. Liquor Legisla- tion. Gorham D. Williams. Popular Science Monthly. 44 : 577-93. Mr. '94. Abolish all Pro- hibitive Liquor Laws. Appleton Morgan. BIBLIOGRAPHY liii Putnam's Monthly. 5 : 694-701. Mr. '09. Prohibition in Georgia : Its Failure to Prevent Drinking in Atlanta and Other Cities. S. Mays Ball. Saturday Evening Post 187 : 24. O. 24, '14. Temperance in Vir- ginia. (Ed.) Saturday Evening Post. 187:33. O. 24, '14. A Reply to Mr. White. Hugh F. Fox. Sunset. 33:688-90. O. '14. Immoral Legislation. William J. Button. Twentieth Century Magazine. 3:401-5. F. 'n. Legal Righteous- ness and Christian Ethics. P. Gavan Duffy. Westminster Review. 147:408-28. Ap. '97. The Drink Evil and Its Cure. A. G. Herzfeld. Westminster Review. 161:524-32. My. '04. Science and the Drunkard. W. H. Champness. The files of the following papers will be found to contain many articles opposing Prohibition that will be of value to debaters : American Brewers' Review. 327 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, IlL American Wine Press and Mineral W r ater News. (Monthly.) 302 Broadway, New York City. Beacon. (Weekly.) 117 North Main Street, East St. Louis, IlL Bonfort's Wine and Spirit Circular. (Semi-monthly.) 78 Broad Street, New York City. Braun's Iconoclast. (Monthly.) 508 Hearst Building, Chicago, IlL Brewer's JournaL (Monthly.) I Hudson Street, New York City. Champion of Fair Play. (Weekly.) 920 Schiller Building, Chi- cago, 111. Communications of the Master Brewers' Association of the United States. (Monthly.) St Louis, Mo. Current Thought (Monthly.) Manufacturers' and Dealers' As- sociation of America, 36 West Randolph Street, Chicago, IlL Liberal Advocate. (Weekly.) Ohio Liquor League, 115 S. Wall Street, Columbus, O. Mida's Criterion. (Semi-monthly.) 536 South Clark Street, Chi- cago, IlL National Bottlers' Gazette. (Monthly.) 99 Nassau Street, New York City. liv BIBLIOGRAPHY National Liquor Dealers' Journal. (Weekly.) 220 Third Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pa. North American Wine and Spirit Journal. (Monthly.) 101 Tre- mont Street, Boston, Mass. Our Side. (Weekly.) 200 Third Street N, Minneapolis, Minn. Pacific Wine, Brewing, and Spirit Review. (Monthly.) 422 Mont- gomery Street, San Francisco, Cal. Pure Products. (Monthly.) 50 East Fortieth Street, New York City. Wholesalers' and Retailers' Review. (Monthly.) 862 Pacific Building, San Francisco, Cal. Wine and Spirit Bulletin. (Monthly.) 39 American National Bank Building, Louisville, Ky. SELECTED ARTICLES ON PROHIBITION OF THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC INTRODUCTION "The conflict between man and alcohol is as old as civiliza- tion," wrote Senator Henry W. Blair in his book, "The Tem- perance Movement," published in 1888. He also tells us that the manufacture and drinking of alcohol was forbidden more than 4,000 years ago by the Emperor of China, and that since that time on many different occasions and in many different lands laws have been passed to restrict or to prohibit the use of intoxicants. The struggle to keep Bacchus out expresses in the beautiful figurative way of the ancient Greeks the idea that at that time Prohibition was agitating the minds of men. So it is clear that there is nothing new about the struggle that is now being waged against the use of alcoholic liquors for beverages in so many different countries. Nor is there anything new about Prohibition as a state-wide measure. In the United States there have been two great Prohibition movements that have spread over the country and commanded a large measure of public attention, and in saying this we must not lose sight of the fact there has also been a small group of very earnest enemies of the liquor traffic who have waged incessant warfare against it for more than a century. The first of these two movements was about the middle of the nineteenth century and might be said to have begun with the passage of a state- wide Prohibition law in Maine in 1846. In most of the northern and northeastern states there was an effort made to adopt a similar law, and it was successful in thirteen of them. In all but a few cases the action was soon rescinded and public attention was diverted from the question by the Civil War. fl v , , c SELECTED ARTICLES ON A] i e KH V '! I t3 l A ..o* TABLE i STATE-WIDE PROHIBITION Statutory or No. State constitutional Adopted Repealed 1 Maine Statutory 1846 1856 2 Illinois Statutory 1851 1853 3 Massachusetts Statutory 1852 1868 4 Rhode Island Statutory 1852 1863 5 Vermont Statutory 1852 1903 6 Michigan Statutory 1853 1875 7 Connecticut Statutory 1854 1872 8 Delaware Statutory 1855 1857 9 Indiana 1 Statutory 1855 1858 10 Iowa Statutory 1855 1857 1 1 Nebraska Statutory 1855 1858 12 New Hampshire Statutory 1855 1903 13 New York 1 Statutory 1855 1856 i Maine Statutory 1858 14 Kansas Statutory 1867 3 Massachusetts Statutory 1869 1875 4 Rhode Island Statutory 1874 1875 14 Kansas Constitutional 1880 , 10 Iowa 1 Constitutional 1882 1883 i Maine Constitutional 1884 10 Iowa Statutory 1884 1894 4 Rhode Island Constitutional 1886 1889 15 South Dakota Constitutional 1889 1896 1 6 North Dakota Constitutional 1889 17 Georgia Statutory 1907 18 Oklahoma Constitutional 1907 19 Alabama Statutory 1908 1911 20 Mississippi Statutory 1908 21 Tennessee Statutory 1909 22 North Carolina Statutory 1909 23 West Virgina Constitutional 1912 24 Colorado Constitutional 1914 25 Virginia Statutory 1914 26 Arizona Constitutional 1914 27 Oregon Constitutional 1914 28 Washington Statutory 1914 29 Arkansas Statutory 1915 30 Idaho Statutory 1915 10 Iowa Statutory 1915 21 Alabama Statutory 1915 31 South Carolina Statutory 1915 1 Declared unconstitutional by the courts, ^T" PROHIBITION 3 The second Prohibition movement in the United States may be said to have begun with the adoption of a state-wide law in Georgia in 1907. It has affected the South and West chiefly, fifteen states in these sections of the country having adopted Prohibition since Georgia did, and several more will vote on the question within the next two years. Table I, on page 2, shows the list of states that have actually adopted Prohibition as a state-wide measure. In Wisconsin in 1855 and in Utah in 1915 such a bill passed both houses of the legislature, but was vetoed by the governor. In most of the other states Prohibition bills have been considered in the legisla- ture, or submitted to the voters in a referendum. Thirty-one of the states have actually adopted a state-wide law or amendment to the constitution, several of them repealing it and then adopt- ing it again. In nineteen of the states, or more than one- third of the total number, it is now incorporated in the law, eight of them having written it into their constitutions. In the following states the people are soon to vote on Prohibition as a state-wide measure: Statutory or State constitutional Date of vote Ohio Constitutional November 1915 Vermont Statutory March 1916 Idaho Constitutional November 1916 South Dakota Constitutional November 1916 Montana Statutory November 1916 Iowa 1 Constitutional November 1917 1 If ratified by the legislature in 1917. As a nation-wide measure by an amendment to the federal constition, Prohibition was first introduced in Congress by Henry W. Blair in 1876, he then being a member of the House of Representatives. On December 22, 1914, the Hobson reso- lution was debated and voted upon in the House. While it failed to get the two-thirds vote that is necessary to pass an amendment to the Constitution, and failed to get the votes of a majority of all members of the House, it did get the votes of a majority of those voting on it. Perhaps the most impor- tant thing about this vote is the fact that it showed, as William J. Bryan pointed out in his Commoner, that the argument that national Prohibition would be a violation of states' rights 4 SELECTED ARTICLES ON did not have great weight with the members of Congress. The following list is taken from the Commoner for January, 1915. The States' Rights States Analysis of vote passed in the House on the Hobson resolu- tion: Not Yeas Nays voting Alabama 4 5 i Arkansas 7 Florida 2 . . 2 Georgia 8 3 i Louisiana i 6 i Mississippi 7 i North Carolina 6 i 3 South Carolina 7 Tennessee 9 . . i Texas 4 12 2 Virginia 8 2 63 30 ii TABLE 2 LIQUOR STATISTICS FOR THE UNITED STATES IQOO, Distilled Malt Vinous liquors liquors liquors Total Number of establishments 613 1,414 290 2,317 Persons engaged 8,328 66,725 2,726 77,779 Capital invested $ 72,450,000 $671,158,000 $27,908,000 $771,516,000 Wages paid 3,074,000 41,206,000 972,000 45,252,000 Cost of materials used . . 35,977,ooo 96,596,000 6,626,000 139,199,000 Value of product 204,699,000 374,730,000 13,121,000 592,550,000 The size of the liquor industry, the annihilation of which Prohibition contemplates, is shown in Table 2. These are the official figures for 1909, given in the 1910 census report. They show that the liquor industry, that is, the manufacturing of liquor, employs a body of men about the size of the entire standing army of the United States, that its invested capital is greater than the total assessed value of the city of St. Louis, or about twice what the Panama Canal cost, and that the total wages it paid in that year were greater than those paid in the same year in the hosiery and knit goods industries of the country. The liquor interests claim that they pay higher wages than the average industry, and their opponents claim that a given amount of capital invested in the liquor business will furnish PROHIBITION 5 employment for fewer men than the same capital invested in almost any other industry. The facts seem to sustain both of these contentions, but it is interesting to observe that a smaller percentage of the total expenditure goes out in wages than in the average industry, as is shown in Table 3. TABLE 3 Per cent of total expenses reported for Industry Salaries Wages Materials Misc. ex. Average all industries 5.1 18.6 65.8 10.5 Distilled liquors i.o 1.6 18.4 79.0 Malt liquors 7.6 13.7 32.2 46.5 In Table 4 are shown the statistics concerning the con- sumption of liquors in the United States. The increase in the number of Prohibition and local option states has not yet decreased the amount of liquor used. The per capita con- sumption is now five times as much as it was in the middle of the nineteenth century when the first Prohibition movement began, but this increase has been in the malt liquors which contain a smaller percentage of alcohol. We might summarize this table by saying that the average American family consumes almost four barrels of alcoholic liquor a year. TABUS 4 ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES From the Statistical Abstract of the United States for 1914. p. 675. Total Gals. 4.17 4.08 6.42 7.70 8.67 10.08 12.28 iS-53 16.57 17.76 19.85 22.19 22.50 Prohibition, like every radical social reform intended for the general good, should be judged by its results. And what Total Per capita consumption Year consumption Wines Spirits Beer Gals. Gals. Gals. Gals. 1840 71,244,823 29 2.52 1.36 1850 94,712,853 .27 2.23 1.58 1860 202,120,007 34 2.86 3.22 1870 296,876,931 32 2.07 5-31 1875 381,065,041 45 1.50 6.71 1880 505,845,038 .56 1.27 8.26 1885 689,424,459 39 27 10.62 1890 972,705,175 .46 .40 13-67 1895 1,142,552,426 30 .14 15-13 1900 1,349,732,435 39 .28 16.09 1905 1,694,455,976 .41 .42 18.02 1910 2,045,353,450 .65 .42 20.09 1914 2,252,272,765 52 1.46 20.51 6 SELECTED ARTICLES ON are these results? Three states, it might seem, have tried Prohibition long enough to enable students to form an opinion as to its practicability. Maine has had it since 1858, Kansas since 1869, and North Dakota since 1889. These states would appear sufficiently far apart to furnish a threefold experiment. But even if these states had made no amendment in their own Prohibition law since its first adoption, the changes in the United States law are such that we have not yet the data necessary to form the basis for a final judgment of the workings of Prohibition. The "original package" decision in 1890 (135 U. S. 100), the Wilson law in 1890, and the Webb- Kenyon law of 1913 have been equivalent to fundamental changes in the state laws, for they have altered the status of Prohibition very materially. Considering these facts, how well has Prohibition succeeded? Prof. A. R. Hatton, of Western Reserve University, in speaking to the Pittsburgh Conference for Good City Govern- ment, said: "Prohibition by law operating uniformly through- out the state to which it is applied is one of the highest praised and most condemned institutions which this country knows. The fact seems to be that it deserves without stint neither the one nor the other." "The advocates of the prohibition of the liquor traffic," says the Royal Commission of Canada, "claim that where laws of a prohibitory nature have been enacted material benefits have followed, that the customs of the people have improved, the condition of the community been greatly advanced, the moral tone raised, and marked social advance made. On the contrary, it is asserted by those opposed to prohibitory legislation, that such enactments have been followed by the development of other evils, that the traffic in intoxicants has been driven into corners, back alleys, and other hiding places, that it is carried on in the lowest places by the dregs of society, that it produces perjury and hypocrisy amongst the people, corruption among officials, tends to increase drunkenness in homes and the sale of adulterated and poisonous liquor." Such is usually the testimony when zealous social reformers and selfish business interests come in conflict, and the most obvious conclusion is that the student must scan all evidence with great care. In the heat of such a conflict rash and inaccu- rate statements are apt to issue from both parties. For example, in a pamphlet very widely circulated over the country a few years ago is the statement that alcohol causes PROHIBITION 7 2,000 deaths a day in the United States alone, and in another issued by the other side we read the claim that more liquor is consumed in the Prohibition states than in the license states. No comment is necessary! While one need not go quite so far as Mr. Isaac Fisher in his able article in Everybody's Magazine for September, 1914 (reprinted in full in this volume) and say, "The only opinions on the liquor problem that are worth very much are those held by persons who hav no immediate personal interest in the preservation of the saloon or in its abolition," still we should at least go so far as to follow the rule of Bacon and "Read not to believe and take for granted, but to weigh and consider." States Dakota Kansas 204.2 298.8 169.5 194-9 1 08.8 172.2 TABtE 5 THE RESULTS OF PROHIBITION (As shown by the official statistics of the United States for the year 1910 unless otherwise indicated) West New North United England Central North States States Maine Insane in hospitals, per 100,000 of population Feeble-minded in institu- tions, per 100,000 of population 36.9 Paupers in almshouses, per 100,000 of population' . Sentenced prisoners in penal institutions per 100,000 of population.. Per cent of persons 10 years of age and older illiterate Per cent of homes owned Per cent of persons 6 to 20- years of age attend- 66.1 54.4 40.6 46.6 91.5 181.4 127-3 54-7 27.0 14-0 121.4 161.6 98.3 80.2 63.3 7.7 45-8 0.7 39-7 1.4 62.3 1.7 58.1 0.3 75-1 36.9 43.5 91.1 0.8 59- * ing school 62.3 Per cent of children 6 to 14 years of age attend- ing school 81.4 91.9 Per cent of total popula- tion 15 years of age and over divorced .... .5 .67 Average annual number of divorces 1898-1902 per 100,000 of married pop- ulation 200 173 67.7 67.9 64.1 70.6 89.2 87.5 80.7 88.2 282 248 268 286 8 PROHIBTION Nothing is clearer than that a comparison of one Prohibition state with one other adjoining license state, in respect to any of the conditions that it might be expected would be affected by Prohibition, would not form the basis for a conclusion of any value. In Table 5, on page 7, is shown a comparison of the three states that have given Prohibition a fair trial with the whole United States, and with the group of states of which the Prohibition states are members. This is the fairest comparison that can be made, yet even here it is difficult to make a com- parison on the basis of crime and death, because these statistics are not in such shape as to make a satisfactory comparison possible. An effort to make such a comparison was made by Hon. Oscar W. Underwood in his speech on the Hobson resolution, reprinted in this volume, to which the reader is referred. When we enquire as to whether alcohol is food or poison, we find that the authorities are not in agreement. The best we can do is to quote the conclusions of the best experts. LAMAR T. BEMAN. September 20, 1915. GENERAL DISCUSSION Coleman, Walter M. Human Biology The Physiological Effects of Alcohol The more blood goes to the skin, the more blood is cooled. The body as a whole may be cooler, but we feel warmer when there is more blood in the skin because of the effect of the warm blood upon the nerves of temperature. There are no nerves for perceiving temperature except in the skin and mucous membrane, and the body has practically no sensation of heat and cold except from the skin or mucous membrane. That alcoholic drinks make the skin red is commonly noticed. Often the skin is flushed by one drink; the bloodshot eyes and purple skin of the toper are the results of habitual use. Can you explain why alcohol brings a deceptive feeling of warmth? Why does alcohol increase the danger of freezing during very cold weather? pp. 21-2. After a person has taken an alcoholic drink his face and skin are likely to become flushed, and perhaps his heart beats faster. Most investigators have found that the alcohol itself does not directly increase or strengthen the action of the heart. Hence it is probably wrong to call alcohol a heart stimulant. The flushing of the skin is believed to be due to the relaxing effect of alcohol. It relaxes, it paralyzes, the vasomotor nerves which control the little muscle fibers in the walls of the blood vessels. The relaxing and enlarging of the blood vessels de- creases the resistance to the blood flow, and the heart beats faster under its lighter load. The narcotic effect of alcohol is much more powerful than its irritating or stimulating effect. The effect of alcohol in causing fatty degeneration of the muscles often weakens the heart and other blood vessels, pp. 67-8. A few years ago Professor Atwater proved that if alcohol is taken in small quantities it is so completely burned in the body that not over 2 per cent is excreted. He infered that it io SELECTED ARTICLES ON is a food, since it gives heat to the body and possibly gives energy also. His experiments did not show whether any organ was weakened or injured by its use. As alcohol is chiefly burned in the liver, it probably cannot supply energy as is the case with food burned in nerve cell and muscle cell. The heat supplied by its burning is largely lost by the rush of blood to the skin usually caused by drinking the alcohol. Dr. Beebe, unlike Professor Atwater, experimented upon persons who had never taken alcohol, and whose bodies had not had time to become trained to resist its evil effects. He found that it caused an increased excretion of nitrogen. When the body became used to it, this decreased, but the proteid excreted by the kidneys contained an abnormal amount of a harmful material called uric acid. Uric acid, a substance which is present in rheumatism and other diseases, is usually destroyed by the liver. As the burden of destroying the alcohol falls chiefly upon the liver, it is not surprising to find that it is so weakened and injured by alcoholic drink that it cannot fully perform its important functions. Bright's disease and other diseases accompanied by uric acid are more frequent among persons who use alcoholic drinks, pp. 113-4. Journal of the American Medical Association. 35:68. July 14, 1900 The Relation of Alcohol to Nutrition. Is Alcohol a Food? Dr. Winfield S. Hall W. O. Atwater, professor of chemistry at Wesleyan Uni- versity, Middletown, Conn., and head of the work being done in the government experiment stations on the chemistry of foods, has arraigned the school textbooks of physiology before the American people on the charge of falsehood, because these books teach the boys of America that alcohol is a poison and not a food, while his experiments with men shut up in a calori- meter demonstrate to his satisfaction that "alcohol is a food" and "not a poison, in moderate quantities." Professor Atwater's definition of food is "that which taken into the body builds tissues or yields energy." Note especially the alternative between "tissue-building" and "energy-yielding." According to this experimenter, any substance is a food if it is oxidized "in PROHIBITION ii the body" anywhere between the mouth and the excretory surface. Not since the days of Liebig, a half-century ago, have the bars that set a boundary to foods been so ruthlessly torn down. Even iron filings and phosphorus satisfy the terms of this definition; and a long list of ptomains, leucomains, and toxins come clearly within the definition. Journal of the American Medical Association. 35: 71. July 14, 1900. Dr. Winfield S. Hall The Truth About Alcohol 1. A certain quantity will pro- duce a certain effect at first, but it requires more and more to produce the same effect when the drug is used habitually. 2. When used habitually, it is likely to induce an uncontrollable desire for more, in ever increasing amounts. 3. After its habitual use a sud- den total abstinence is likely to cause a serious derangement of the central nervous system. 4. Alcohol is oxidized rapidly in the body. 5. Alcohol, not being useful, is not stored in the body. 6. Alcohol is a product of decom- position of food in the presence of a scarcity of oxygen. 7. Alcohol is an excretion and, in common with all excretions, is poisonous. It may be beneficial in certain phases of disease, but it is never beneficial to the healthy body. 8. The use of alcohol, in com- mon with narcotics in general, is followed by a reaction. g. The use of alcohol is followed by a decrease in the activity of the muscle-cells and brain cells. 10. The use of alcohol is fol- lowed by a decrease in the secretion of CO,. 11. The use of alcohol .is fol- lowed by an accumulation of fat thru decreased activity. 12. The use of alcohol is fol- lowed by a fall in body temperature. 13. The use of alcohol weakens and unsteadies the muscles. 14. The use of alcohol makes the brain less active and accurate. Food 1. A certain quantity will pro- duce a certain effect at first, and the same quantity will always pro- duce the same effect in a healthy body. 2. The habitual use of food never induces an uncontrollable desire for it, in ever increasing amounts. 3. After its habitual use a sud- den total abstinence never causes any derangement of the central nervous system. 4. All foods are oxidized slowly in the body. 5. All foods, being useful, are stored in the body. 6. All foods are the products of constructive activity of protoplasm in the presence of abundant oxygen. 7. All foods are formed by na- ture for nourishment and are by nature wholesome and always bene- ficial to the healthy body, tho they may injure the body in certain phases of disease. 8. The use of foods is followed by no reaction. 9. The use of food is followed by an increased activity of the muscle-cells and brain-cells. 10. The use of food is followed by an increase in the excretion of CO,. n. The use of food may be fol- lowed by an accumulation of fat, notwithstanding increased activity. 12. The use of food is followed by a rise in body temperature. 13. The use of food strengthens and steadies the muscles. 14. The use of food makes the brain more active and accurate. 12 SELECTED ARTICLES ON Stewart, Dr. G. N. A Manual of Physiology, pp. 618-19 The Facts about Alcohol 1. In small quantities alcohol is oxidized in the body, a little of it, however, being excreted unchanged in the breath and urine. A certain amount of protein is saved from decom- position when alcohol is taken, just as when fat or sugar is taken. For example, the addition of 130 grams of sugar to the daily food of an individual caused a sparing of 0.3 gram nitro- gen. The substitution of 72 grams alcohol for the sugar caused 0.2 gram nitrogen to be spared. (Atwater and Benedict.) Alcohol is therefore to some extent a food substance, although it is not, under ordinary circumstances, taken for the sake of the energy its oxidation can supply, but as a stimulant. 2. There is no reason to suppose that this energy cannot be utilized as a source of work in the body. Indeed a certain amount of alcohol may be normally formed in the tissues as one of the intermediate products in the oxidation of sugar. Heat can certainly be produced from it, but this is far more than counterbalanced by the increase in the heat loss which the dilation of the cutaneous vessels caused by alcohol brings about. 3. It is a valuable drug, when judiciously employed, in cer- tain diseases e. g. pneumonia, and puerperal insanity. (Clouston.) 4. Alcohol is occasionally of use in disorders not amounting to serious diseases e. g. in some cases of slow and difficult digestion. In these cases it may act by increasing the flow of certain of the digestive secretions, as saliva and gastric juice. This effect seems to more than counterbalance the retarding influence which, except when well diluted, it exerts on the chemical processes of digestion. The action of alcohol on the secretion of gastric juice has been studied in a dog with a double gastric and oesophageal fistula. Before or during a sham meal of meat, alcohol diluted with water was given as an enema. After the enema the quantity of hydrochloric acid secreted increased in about the same pro- portion as the quantity of juice, but the pepsin was diminished, reaching a minimum after three-quarters to one and a quarter hours. The increase in the total quantity of the juice and in the acid over-compensated the moderate diminution in the PROHIBITION 13 digestive power, so that the net result was beneficial. (Pekel- haring.) But it must be remembered that strong alcoholic beverages, when mixed with the gastric juice, and therefore when taken by the mouth, retard the proteolytic action, so that any favorable effect on the secretion of the juice may easily be lost in the subsequent digestion, unless the alcohol is dilute. (Chittenden and MendeL) The action of alcohol introduced into the rectum on the gastric secretion is both reflex and direct. 5. Alcohol is of no use for healthy men. 6. Alcohol in strictly moderate doses (not more than i}4 ounces of absolute alcohol), properly diluted and especially when taken with food, is not harmful to healthy men, living and working under ordinary conditions. 7. Modern experience goes to show that in severe and continuous exertion, coupled with exposure to all weathers, as in war and in exploring expeditions, alcohol is injurious, and it is well known that it must be avoided in mountain climbing. Alcohol in small doses, when given by the stomach or (in animals) injected into the blood, causes stimulation of the respiratory center and increase in the pulmonary ventilation. In man, this increase usually amounts to 8 to 15 per cent, but is occasionally much greater. But the limit which separates the favorable action of the small dose from the hurtful action of the large, is easily overstepped. \\Tien this is done, and the dose is continually increased, the activity of the respiratory center is first diminished and finally abolished. In dogs, for instance, after the injection of considerable quantities of alcohol into the stomach, death takes place from respiratory failure, and the breathing when the heart is still unweakened. This is the final outcome of a progressive impairment in the activity of the center, of which the slow and heavy breathing of the drunken man represents an earlier stage. West Virginia Medical Journal. 7:260-4. February, 1913 Alcohol and Heredity. Dr. C. C. Wholey Whether or not the question of the effect of alcohol upon heredity be debatable, science leaves no grounds for discussion as to the direct effect upon the individual. It is not necessary, indeed, to call upon science for demonstration; a walk through 14 SELECTED ARTICLES ON a ward for alcoholics, or for the insane in any hospital, lays bare the appalling results of chronic alcoholism all grades of inflammation of the nerves from that of the single nerve, or group of nerves, to complete paralysis of the arms and legs. There is in the body no nerve which may not become the seat of inflammation induced by alcohol; and the brain itself may become affected, manifesting the injury in delirium tremens, strange delusions, and lapses of memory, under which crimes, impossible to the same individual under normal condition, such as forgery or murder, may be committed, and finally the result is all too often incurable insanity. I will quote from the latest bulletin of Manhattan State Hospital: "Of the insane under the care of the state 28 per cent owe their insanity to alcohol as a determining cause. In many instances there are other contributing causes, but these cases of insanity would not have occurred had it not been for the use of alcohol." Dr. Hoch says: "From a series of 15,000 male patients admitted to hospitals in New York and Massachusetts, 24 per cent suffered from alcoholic insanity." Cushny, the most noted modern authority on the action of drugs, says: "Even the smallest quantities of alcohol tend to lessen the activity of the brain, the drug appearing to act most strongly, and, therefore in the smallest quantities, on the most recently acquired faculties, to annihilate those qualities which have been built up through education and experience, the power of self-control, and the sense of responsibility. Brief Excerpts To talk of alcohol as a food is really absurd. Dr. Woods Hutchinson in "A Handbook of Health," p. 97. Alcohol tends to lower the temperature of the body by increasing the amount of heat lost. Dr. Milton J. Rosenaw in "Preventive Medicine and Hygiene" p. 355. The long and sad experience of the race with alcohol proves that the attempt to adapt the body to its use should be given up. Walter M. Coleman in "Human Biology," p. 22. In small quantities therefore alcohol can act as a food. This function, however, is quite unimportant, and is overshadowed PROHIBITION 15 by the poisonous action of the substance. Dr. Ernest H. Star- ling in "Principles of Human Physiology" p. 724. Alcohol does not belong to the poisons. It is rather a sub- stance which, taken in moderation, nourishes and exerts special effects on the nervous system, effects that are not even disturb- ances, and therefore not phenomena of poisoning. Dr. J. Starke in "Alcohol, the Sanction for Its Use" p. xx. I think that I am not overstating the case in saying that an ordinary, healthy adult may take without injury i l /i to 2 ounces of whisky (or other spirits) or two pints of light ale, or the equivalent in some other form of alcoholic drink, in a day. Possibly I might go further and state that in the case of a young, vigorous man, taking much vigorous exercise, pro- ducing excessive tissue waste, even more might be consumed without injury. The same applies to the hard-working laborer, the performance of whose daily work entails great output of muscular energy. Dr. Sydney Hillier in "Popular Drugs" pp. 61-2. If there does exist any minimum of alcohol which is harm- less, it must be exceedingly small. The best recent statistics indicate that even moderate drinking is harmful. The results of the medico-actuarial investigation based on statistical data from forty-three American life insurance companies covering an experience of twenty-five years shows (i) that the indi- viduals who took two glasses of beer or a glass of whisky or an equivalent amount of alcohol in any form each day showed a mortality 18 per cent higher than the average of the group; (2) that the mortality among those who had indulged in occa- sional alcoholic excesses previous to their application for life insurance was 50 per cent higher than the average, which means the loss of four years to such lives; (3) that men who acknowl- edged the habit of indulging somewhat freely, but who were still considered acceptable for insurance, showed a mortality of 86 per cent higher than the average. These were all men who would call themselves, and who would be called, moderate drinkers. Prof. Irving Fisher in "Eli Spring Book" May, 1915. 16 SELECTED ARTICLES ON i Everybody's Magazine. 31:383-8. September, 1914 Rum and Remedies. Isaac Fisher What I know about the rum or liquor question is really what I have learned from the experiences and investigations of others. The whole subject is so broad that I think what is said above is true of all persons who have tried to understand the drink problem. I prefer, therefore, to say that I have learned : That few persons have taken time to consider that there are four aspects of the liquor question; namely: legislative, eco- nomic, physiological, and ethical or moral. Great hosts of those who discuss the subject assume that the whole question is ethical only. That candidates for public office are seldom in a position to. make the best spokesmen against the liquor traffic, nor are their words worthy of greatest weight when spoken for the saloon. That the only opinions on the liquor problem that are worth very much are those held by persons who have no immediate personal interest in the preservation of the saloon or in its aboli- tion. Men and women who have demonstrated by constructive work in other fields their interest in mankind at large deserve a hearing on the liquor question when they essay to discuss it. With these premises before me, I determined to lay aside the partisan conclusions and arguments for and against the liquor traffic, met with every day, and search for the conclu- sions of persons falling within the third class above. Two sets of such persons I have found: (i) The Committee of Fifty; and (2) The American Society for the Study of Alcohol and other Narcotics. The Committee of Fifty The men who composed the famous Committee of Fifty, in 1898, are persons long connected with movements concerning the highest good of the United States of America. They rep- resented different communities, occupations, and opinions; and they were not, with very few exceptions, candidates for office ; at the same time they were men of the highest personal honor. Before arriving at any conclusions, the committee examined: Prohibition in Maine Prohibition in Iowa South Carolina dispensary system PROHIBITION 17 Restrictive system in Massachusetts Liquor laws of Pennsylvania Ohio liquor tax Liquor laws in Indiana since 1851 Missouri local option law This examination concluded, the body reported at great length upon the subject. Its findings on the legislative aspects of the liquor problem may be summarized as follows: /. Prohibition Successes: Abolition and prevention on large scale of sale of distilled and malt liquors within areas covered by it. Removed temptation from young and from persons disposed to alcoholic excess in communities where sentiment is strongly in its favor. Promoted the invention and adoption of many useful restric- tions. Failures: Has failed to exclude intoxicants completely even from districts where public sentiment has been favorable. Has failed, of course, to subdue the drinking passion. Evils: Open defiance of law. Evasion of law. Courts have been weakened. Two-faced and mercenary law officers. Hypocritical and truckling candidates for office. Unfaithful office-holders. II. Local Option Possesses the merit that public sentiment supports the officials who administer the law. ///. Licenses Weaknesses'- Officials elected for short terms make bad licensing-agents because liquor is constantly in politics. Where courts grant license, the former are placed under sus- picion, particularly if the judges' offices are elective. Where commissioners grant license, they force liquor-sellers into politics for protection. Where bonds are required, it has been found that wholesale liquor-dealers get control of retailers by signing their bonds for them. i8 SELECTED ARTICLES ON Certificates of character for liquor-dealers have not proven of much value, since careless officials often have to receive them. IV. Restrictions on Sales Apparently these have reduced the consumption of liquor, though the amount of the reduction cannot be determined. V. Checks upon Druggists The license restrictions upon druggists have checked evil to some extent, but have not controlled the sale of liquor by drug- gists. The committee found it so very difficult to draw any useful inferences as to the effects upon the liquor traffic of arresting persons for drunkenness that they did not attempt to formulate conclusions on the subject. As to the results of legislating so as to remove from the sale of liquor the motive for private profit, the committee held that this had nowhere been successfully carried out up to that time. Regarding the question whether Prohibition prohibits whe- ther it has decreased the consumption of intoxicants and dimin- ished drunkenness, the committee said: "No demonstration on either of these points has been reached, or is now attainable, after more than forty years of observation and experience." As a basis for its report on the economic aspects of the liquor problem, the committee investigated 33 charity organi- zations, 60 almshouses, n children's societies, and 17 prisons and reformatories, besides having the assistance of several state boards of charities and correction. The committee's report on the economic phase of the sub- ject is extremely valuable because it covers, with the exception of the German reports of 1885 and 1887, a larger number of cases than any other report ; a greater variety of cases of pauper- ism; a much wider area than any other report, and a greater number of nationalities. Below are tabulated some conclusions which logically flow from the committee's investigations of this phase of the subject: /. The Supposed Creation of Wealth (Figures are for the year 1896) Of corn, rye, and barley, 58,000,000 bushels went into the production of liquor. PROHIBITION 19 In 1890, $289,775,639 represented the annual value of liquor produced. Capital invested in making and retailing liquor was over $957,000,000. It was estimated that 1,800,000 persons derived their liveli- hood from the liquor traffic. The liquor traffic paid in taxes to support national, state, and local governments $183,213,124. //. The Destruction of Wealth Poverty POVERTY DUE TO LIQUOR Charity Organization Societies 25 per cent of poverty found in these was due directly and indirectly to liquor. 18 per cent of poverty was due directly and 9 per cent indirectly. (In some cases liquor was both direct and indirect cause, making seem- ing discrepancy.) 22.7 per cent of males were poor because of their own drunk- enness; 124 per cent of females had come to want because of their own intemperance. 3.8 per cent of males were poor from drunkenness of others; but 17 per cent of females came to want through drunkenness of others. 14 per cent of aliens were poor from liquor, 17 per cent of native-born citizens, and 25 per cent of naturalized citizens. 19 per cent of whites found were poor from liquor, and 9 per cent of negroes. Almshouses 37 per cent of persons found in these had come to want through use of liquor. 32 per cent of cases were due directly to liquor, and 8 per cent indirectly. 42 per cent of males were poor because of their own drunk- enness, and 16.5 per cent of females because of their own. 6 per cent of males owed their poverty to drunkenness of others; but 12.7 per cent of females had come to want through the drunk- enness of others. 23 per cent of aliens were poor from liquor. 29 per cent of native-born citizens poor from liquor. 43 per cent of naturalized citizens poor from liquor. 33 per cent of whites found in these were poor from liquor, and 17 per cent of negroes. Destitution of children 45 per cent at least due to intem- perance of parents. 43-5 per cent of children of native-born parents were des- titute because of drunkenness of parents; 49.5 per cent of chil- 20 SELECTED ARTICLES ON dren of foreign parents were so destitute; and 60.5 per cent of children of foreign father and native or unknown mother owed their want to the same cause. 46 per cent of children of white parents were destitute be- cause of intemperance of their parents ; and 39 per cent of chil- dren of negroes. CRIME DUE TO LIQUOR 50 per cent of cases of crime were due to liquor in connec- tion with other causes. 31 per cent of cases of crime were due to liquor as a first cause. Economic Forces Working Against Liquor I. The Self-Interest of Wage-Earners. The influence of labor and trade unions is powerful in teaching Sobriety during strikes Moderation in drink, by requiring it. Sobriety, by refusing at times to help reinstate men discharged for drunkenness. Temperateness, by often refusing to admit drunkards. Sobriety, by excluding drunkards from sick benefits. Sobriety, by fining members for intoxication. Sobriety, by excluding liquor from all of their entertain- ments. Sobriety, through desire of union men to elect only sober men to fill the high positions in the unions. //. The Self-Interest of Employers. Employers have been moved to prohibit drinking by their employees To set good example for other employees. To guard against temptation. To prevent accidents. To secure better work. To secure more economy. To secure greater responsibility in positions of trust. Economic Forces Working for, or Favorable to, Liquor The capital invested in the liquor traffic. The number of persons who get their living from the liquor traffic. PROHIBITION 21 For students of the drink problem, the most valuable find- ings of the committee are the following: The difficulties in the way of researches of this kind are enormous. In matters which affect private character, truthful reports are proverbially hard to obtain. The accessible statis- tics are incomplete or inaccurate, or both. The effects of intem- perance in promoting vice and crime are often mixed with the effects of many other causes, such as unhealthy occupations, bad lodgings, poor food, and inherited disabilities; and it is very difficult to disentangle intemperance as a cause from other causes of vice, crime, and pauperism. At every point connected with these investigations the studious observer encounters an intense partisanship, which blinds the eyes of witnesses and obscures the judgment of writers and speakers on the subject. Although the committee examined the physiological aspects of the liquor problem, I have purposely turned from their report on the subject to that of a body of medical scientists the Amer- ican Association for the Study of Alcohol and Other Narcotics, in session in Washington, D. C., in 1909. The conclusions reached at that meeting are summarized as follows: 1. Alcohol not a food Authority, the President of the American Society for the Study of Alcohol and other Narcotics. 2. Not only a poison, but renders the body more suscep- tible to disease Authority, same as above. 3. Does not sustain physical powers nor prevent fatigue Authority as before (also pp. 45, 46). 4. Does not aid digestion Authority, Dr. J. H. Kellogg, Battle Creek Sanitarium. 5. Injures the entire system Authority, Dr. C. H. Hughe?, Editor the Alienist and Neurologist. Alcohol abstracts water from the tissues, function fails, then destruction of the vital organs sets in. 6. Impairs fecundity Authority, same as in i. 7. Impairs mentality British Association for the Advance- ment of Science, 8. Abridges life (Authority, Sir Victor Horsley) Through A. DISEASES DUE TO ALCOHOL ALONE Acute alcoholic poisoning; acute mania; delirium tremens; chronic alcoholic insanity; alcoholic epilepsy; alcoholic neuritis. 22 SELECTED ARTICLES ON B. DISEASES OF WHICH ALCOHOL IS FREQUENTLY A DETERMINING OR CONTRIBUTING CAUSE [Under this heading Mr. Fisher mentions twenty-five diseases. We have not room to print the list. Editors.] C. OTHER AGENCIES Accidents caused by alcohol; infant mortality due to alcohol- ism of mashers ; premature death caused by alcohol. When we turn to the discussion of the effects which alcohol- ism has upon man's ethical relations his duty, whether to him- self, his family, community, state, or his God we find that there is little need for extended argument or minute catalog- ing. The only thing necessary is to determine to what extent alcoholism is responsible for these sins against the "Thou shalt's" and the "Thou shalt not's." Alcohol Weakens the Will Dr. C. H. Hughes, Editor of the Alienist and Neurologist (Senate Document 48; 6ist Congress, ist session, p. 21), and a great cloud of other witnesses, say that that alcohol extracts the water from all the tissues, and so "robs the brain of its normal functioning capacity, impairing 1 it in mental and psycho- motor and moral capabilities." The significance of this state- ment is best understood when it is recalled that the brain and nerves are 80 per cent water. The conclusion here is irresistible : Intemperance and Drunkenness Are Wrong The performance of all duties, the use of all faculties are dependent upon the will, and it is wrong not to perform one's duties. Alcoholism weakens often destroys the will. There- fore, alcoholism is wrong because by destroying or weakening the will it prevents the performance of duties which of right ought to be performed. Best Remedies for the Liquor Traffic Stop denouncing anybody about the liquor traffic. Get the truth about the liquor question in all of its aspects. (a) Interest of physicians must be enlisted so that they will take a stand against liquor. They can help by PROHIBITION 23 Making clear statements as to uselessness of alcohol as a food and medicine. Making clear statements of the injurious effects of alcohol upon animal organism. Showing the effects of the habitual use of small quantities of alcohol. Showing the effects of the grasp of habit Showing whether the pleasures of indulgence can offset the resulting evils. Giving the correct explanation of the seeming stimulation of liquor. Showing the relation of moderation to immoderation and loss of self-control. (&) Interest students of morbid psychology in the study of causes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 mentioned above. Get the truth about the whole liquor question to the people. Intercollegiate Statesman. 12:73-6. February, 1915 The Congressional Debate on National Prohibition. D. Leigh Colvin The Hobson Resolution Whereas exact scientific research has demonstrated that alcohol is a narcotic poison, destructive and degenerating to the human organism, and that its distribution as a beverage or contained in foods lays a staggering economic burden upon the shoulders of the people, lowers to an appalling degree the average standard of character of our citizenship, thereby under- mining the public morals and the foundation of free institutions; produces widespread crime, pauperism, and insanity; inflicts disease and untimely death upon hundreds of thousands of citizens and blights with degeneracy their children unborn, threatening the future integrity and the very life of the nation. Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House con- curring therein), That the following amendment of the Constitution be, and hereby is, proposed to the states, to become valid as a part of the consti- tution when ratified by the legislatures of the several states as provided by the constitution. "ARTICLE . "SECTION i. The sale, manufacture for sale, transportation for sale, importation for sale, and exportation for sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes in the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof are forever prohibited. 24 SELECTED ARTICLES ON "SEC. 2. Congress shall have power to provide for the manufacture sale, importation, and transportation of intoxicating liquors for sacramental, medicinal, mechanical, pharmaceutical, or scientific purposes, or for use in the arts, and shall have power to enforce this article by all needful legislation." The first time that the issue of national Prohibition ever reached the floor of Congress it received a majority vote in the House of Representatives. The debate on December 22 lasted over ten hours and over eighty representatives took part, about an equal number on each side. There were many strong arguments on the Prohibition side, but the Prohibition advocates did not exhaust the resources of possible material to the degree that the anti-Prohibitionists did. This was due partly to the fact that many of the congressmen are comparatively new as advocates of Prohibition, but chiefly to the fact that the liquor interests had apparently organized their forces in advance, had assigned different phases to different speakers and abundantly supplied them with well prepared material. The liquor sup- porters seemed to put forth about every anti-Prohibition argument which has been devised. The Ten Best Speeches on Each Side Only a suggestion of the argument is possible in the space here. The debate is contained in the Congressional Record of December 22, 1914, and twenty-five additional speeches or "extension of remarks" are in the back pages of the Record for the five succeeding days, December 23, 29, 30, 31 and Janu- ary 2, 1915, with a few scattered through later dates. The better speeches on the Prohibition side were by Hobson, pages 533 and 585; Campbell, 518; Kelly, 523; Hulings, 532; Thomson, 538; Webb, 539; Lindquist, 547; Powers, 550; Lindbergh, 564, and Stephens, 579. The better speeches in opposition to the resolution were by Cantrill, 519; Pou, 527; Mann, 542; Bartholdt, 553; Barchfield, 558 ; Henry, 623 ; Vollmer, 634 ; Underwood, 691 ; Witherspoon, 702, and Morrison, 750. "Extension of remarks," indicating the positions of opponents after the debate was over: Graham, 759; Stringer, 874, and Adair, 955. I. The Argument for National Constitutional Prohibition i. The nature of alcohol. Mr. Hobson based his funda- mental argument on the scientific facts concerning alcohol. It is (a) a protoplasmic poison, (6) a habit-forming drug, (c) PROHIBITION 25 has an affinity for the top of the brain, attacking die line of human evolution. Alcohol interferes with the orderly evolution of the human race. It shortens life and blights offspring. Do not talk about Prohibition invading the rights of individuals; liquor blights the rights of our citizens before they are born. Science shows that not only distilled liquors do harm, but all alcohol does harm, and that not only the abuse of alcohol is bad but the widespread moderate drinking produces much more harm than drunkenness. 2. The social consequences of alcohol as a basis for Prohi- bition were frequently referred to. We owe a duty to society to protect it against the many evils that flow from the liquor traffic. 3. Economic aspects were (a) the big balance against the liquor traffic on account of the cost of taking care of its victims, (ft) the loss in the productivity of labor, and (c) waste. If the traffic in itself is not desirable and useful then the employ- ment of people in such useless and harmful occupation is * waste. All those thrown out of employment by the adoption of Prohibition, and many more, could be supported in comfort by the undeveloped yet fertile lands of three Minnesota districts. 4. The political menace. The menace of the growing degen- erate vote due to liquor affects not only voters and states but the nation. Liquor not only creates the degenerate vote but furnishes corruption funds to purchase it. The organized traffic corrupts elections, debauches voters, debases many legislators and other officials. Political machines bottomed on the liquor traffic and supplied by it with corruption funds influence national elections, elect senators and congress- men. The purity of national elections, the integrity of national lawmaking bodies, the preservation of national institutions, all are deeply involved in the question and demand that action be taken by national authority. 5. Why national. While no speaker made a systematic argument showing the national character of the issue, most assuming it required no argument, several touched upon the national aspect: (1) The traffic is national in scope, its proportions menace the nation as a whole, and no particular state is competent to solve the liquor problem. (2) Under the present system of limiting Prohibition to X 26 SELECTED ARTICLES ON small units the great liquor trust has trampled upon the rights of states and communities and has taken pride in proclaiming that "Prohibition does not prohibit." This pose of the liquor outlaw that he is above the operation of local law is a conclusive demonstration of the need of national law. (3) Local option and state Prohibition, though valuable and useful, have not proved adequate. (4) So long as there is one state wet it will be the base of operations and source of supply for the liquor trust. (5) A state does not have the right to be wet, because, being wet, no neighboring state can be protected in its right to be dry. (6) Coping with trusts and monopolies is no longer regarded as a state task. The liquor trust was one of the first and worst great monopolies. (7) This is a nation, and in many matters of common interest state lines and state rights are being wiped out by obvious necessities arising out of new conditions which state power cannot meet and which require the paramountcy of the federal government, and hence amendments to the constitution are from time to time required. (8) It is not a question of whether the government has the moral right to take issue out of the hands of the states. But government has the right and should protect the people against an evil that is degenerating and destroying the homes of the American people. 6. Analogous exercise of federal power. (1) Compared with the conservation movement. The gov- ernment conserves forest, mineral and water power, the birds of the air and the beasts of the field, excepting alone the youth of the country, the human element, the nation itself. Prohibition provides for the national conservation of humanity. (2) Monopolies. If the government has the right to put out of business the great monopolies and trusts it certainly has the right to put the liquor monopoly out of business. (3) The federal government spends millions to eradicate the foot and mouth disease, the hog cholera, the boll weevil and the cattle tick. "Every time a pesky tick straddles the back of a mangy steer in any of the barren wastes of the sunny South has not the state rights statesman risen up in consternation and yelled to Uncle Sam for help? No question about state rights PROHIBITION 27 then. It is good common sense and good state rights doctrine for the national government to spend millions every year in killing boll weevils, destroying ticks, and saving sick hogs, while not a copper goes to suppress the demon drink which is filling our prisons, despoiling our homes and damning our children ?" 7. Why constitutional Prohibition. To cure this organic disease we must have recourse to organic law. It is needed to give permanency and to bring about the disintegration of the liquor trust If Congress in the exercise of the taxing power should undertake to establish Prohibition by statute the liquor trust would not permanently disintegrate, because what any one Congress can do another Congress can undo. If Prohibition becomes established there will be a chance for a new generation to grow up sober. 8. The object of the amendment is to take away the power of the federal government and the states to propagate the liquor traffic. It aims to destroy the agency that debauches the youth of the land by stopping the profits from the sale of liquor. It is not a sumptuary measure. "It does not provide that a man shall not have or make liquor in his own home for his own use. It is directed only at the sale." This drafting of the amendment so as to avoid the criticisms of being a so-called sumptuary measure was a vulnerable point which the opposition took large advantage of. 9. Submission. Perhaps more time was taken by the sup- porters of the resolution in urging their colleagues to submit it to the states and let the people decide than on any other phase. The people as the sovereign power have the right to say whether the governmental policy of partnership with the liquor traffic shall be continued The tremendous popular demand for sub- mission was shown by the fact that over 6,000,000 citizens had petitioned for it, ten times as many as ever petitioned any government in the history of the world, and also by the fact that 76 per cent of the area, containing 57 per cent of the people, had outlawed the saloon. To the argument that the people's will should be supreme the opposition responded that it was not to be submitted to the people but to the members of the legislatures, which is by no means the same thing. They also pointed out that it is different from an ordinary referendum in that there is no time limit within which an amendment must 28 SELECTED ARTICLES ON f be adopted. If once submitted by Congress there is practically no rejection, as if one legislature rejects, it may be brought up at each succeeding legislature until passed. 10. Refutation. Much of the time of the supporters of the amendment was taken in refuting the contentions of the oppo- sition. These related chiefly to (i) personal liberty, (2) state rights, (3) possible amendment by minority, (4) revenue, (5) confiscation, and (6) concurrent jurisdiction. (1) On personal liberty the usual arguments on both sides. (2) To the state rights contention it was replied (a) that no state is sovereign; each has delegated a part of its powers, and its powers are capable of being further reduced by the action of three-fourths of the states, (fc) There is a distinction between the invasion of the rights of the states and the delega- tion of further power to the national government by the states. It is not robbery of the power of the states when the states themselves delegate the power in the constitutional manner, (c) It is not a question of state rights, but of policy, whether the control of the liquor traffic shall be placed under federal authority, the only power which can efficiently control it. (3) To the statement that it is possible for a minority to amend the constitution because the thirty-six smaller states con- tain about 40,000,000 and the twelve larger states 51,000,000 it was shown how it is possible for one-fortieth of the voters to prevent ratification. The majority of the voters in the thirteen states having the smallest vote was 370,000 in 1912. Those desiring to amend have a tremendous handicap and it was shown that practically the approval of the large majority would be required before the constitution was amended. To oppose amendment on the ground of a possible minority would be to oppose any amendment for any purpose. (4) Revenue, (a) The revenue comes from the consum- ers, not the traffic. (&) The issue is revenue versus ruined lives, (c) Gladstone was quoted that given a sober people he would find an easy means of raising revenue, (d) The Ameri- can people do not propose to support the government through the agencies that will finally destroy it. (5) Confiscation, (a) Court decisions cited, especially Crowley vs. Christensen, where the issue was directly raised. (b) Underwood tariff law placing sugar on the free list, de- stroying property interests of Louisiana sugar growers. They PROHIBITION 29 were advised to turn their soil to growing other crops. Simi- larly, money invested in the liquor traffic can be converted into better avenues of employment. (6) To the contention that the concurrent jurisdiction pro- vided in the resolution was not practicable and that there could not be two governments with different penalties occupying the same territory, both of which were supreme, there was cited the case of the old Indian Territory part of Oklahoma, where the national government had established prohibition as an example of concurrent jurisdiction in enforcing Prohibition. Concurrent action regarding the foot and mouth disease was also cited. //. Argument Against the Amendment The six arguments above cited, with especial emphasis on revenue, confiscation, and state rights. 7. Purpose of the constitution. The organic law is differ- ent from statute law. The constitution is a concise general statement of those fundamental political principles which are essential to political liberty and on which the people are in sub- stantial agreement. The provisions of a constitution should have practically unanimous sympathy and support. They should not be placed in the constitution until they are tried out and acquiesced in by practically all the people The thirteenth amendment was not added until slavery was settled. The fifteenth amendment was not the result of crystallized public opinion, and it is not only evaded but practically ignored. 8. // is a local question. If only one state opposed Pro- hibition it would not be right to inflict the ideas of the rest of the country, so far as this local question is concerned, on that one state. 9. Imperialism. Fear of federal officers and federal espion- age. It would be terrible to send officers from one state to another. An army of federal officials would be required to enforce it. 10. Impossible to enforce. Cannot legislate people good. No magnet so powerful as prohibited temptation. No law is stronger than the sentiment of the jury in the jury box. Prohibition does not prohibit. It is much easier to enforce the law where the unit is small. It has not been a success in the Prohibition states. 30 SELECTED ARTICLES ON 11. Party interest. The Democratic party is opposed to Prohibition. Quotations from all the platforms since 1856 cited to show the principles of the party are against Prohibition. Leading Democrats of the present also opposed. The injection of Prohibition is a conspiracy to break up the party. How could the party carry out its program of tariff reduction if the liquor revenue is done away with? 12. Prohibition should not be injected into national politics. It has never been established in any state without becoming the sole issue for many years, and other issues should not be subordinated to the enforcement of a Prohibition amendment which cannot be enforced. 13. Objection to the draft of the amendment. It is poorly drafted. Ten different amendments have been submitted. It does not prohibit the manufacture. It legitimatizes the manu- facture for personal use. The resolution is greatly misunder- stood. It does not serve the purpose of the real Prohibitionist who wishes to stop the source of supply by prohibiting the manufacture. Clubs could manufacture on a large scale, and so long as liquor is not sold but furnished to all in return for uniform dues it would be legal. Importation to clubs would' also be permitted. 14. Advocacy of a counter resolution. Another resolution to prohibit importation and interstate transportation was intro- duced but failed to receive support, as Congress already has constitutional power to pass such a measure. AFFIRMATIVE DISCUSSION I Hate the Liquor Traffic: Speech to Indiana Republican State Convention J. Frank Hanly, ex-Governor of Indiana Personally I have seen so much of the evils of the traffic in the last four years, so much of its economic waste, so much of its physical ruin, so much of its mental blight, so much of its tears and heartache, that I have come to regard the business as one that must be held and con- trolled by strong and effective laws. I bear no malice toward those engaged in the business, but I hate the traffic. I hate its every phase. I hate it for its intolerance. I hate it for its arrogance. I hate it for its hypocrisy. I hate it for its cant and craft and false pretenses. I hate it for its commercialism. I hate it for its greed and avarice. I hate it for its sordid love of gain at any price. I hate it for its domination in politics. I hate it for its corrupting influence in civic affairs. I hate it for its incessant effort to debauch the suffrage of the country; for the cowards it makes of public men. I hate it for its utter disregard of law. I hate it for its ruthless trampling of the solemn compacts of state constitutions. I hate it for the load it straps to labor's back; for the palsied hands it gives to toil; for its wounds to genius; for the tragedies of its might- have-beens. I hate it for the human wrecks it has caused. I hate it for the almshouses it peoples ; for the prisons it fills ; for the insanity it begets; for its countless graves in potters' fields. I hate it for the mental ruin it imposes upon its victims; for its spiritual blight; for its moral degradation. I hate it for the crimes it has committed. I hate it for the homes it has destroyed. I hate it for the hearts it has broken. I hate it for the malice it has planted in the hearts of men for its poison, for its bitterness for the dead sea fruit with which it starves their souls. I hate it for the grief it causes womanhood the scalding tears, the hopes deferred, the strangled aspirations, its burden of want and care. I hate 32 SELECTED ARTICLES ON it for its heartless cruelty to the aged, the infirm and the helpless, for the shadow it throws upon the lives of children, for its monstrous injustice to blameless little ones. I hate it as virtue hates vice, as truth hates error, as righteousness hates sin, as justice hates wrong, as liberty hates tyranny, as freedom hates oppression. Commoner. 13: 13. July n, 1913. Denunciation of Alcohol. Robert G. Ingersoll I am aware that there is a prejudice against any man who manufactures alcohol. I believe that from the time it issues from the coiled and poisonous worms in the distillery until it empties into the jaws of death, dishonor and crime, it demora- lizes everybody that touches it, from its source to where it ends. I do not believe anybody can contemplate the object without being prejudiced against the liquor crime. All we have to do, gentlemen, is to think of the wrecks on either bank of the stream of death, of the suicides, of the insanity, of the ignorance, of the destitution, of the little chil- dren tugging at the faded and withered breast of weeping and despairing mothers, of wives asking for bread, of the men of genius it has wrecked, the men struggling with imaginary ser- pents, produced by this devilish thing; and when you think of the jails, of the almshouses, of the asylums, of the prisons, of the scaffolds upon either bank, I do not wonder that every thoughtful man is prejudiced against this damned stuff called alcohol. Intemperance cuts down youth in its vigor, manhood in its strength, old age in its weakness. It breaks the father's heart, bereaves the doting mother, extinguishes natural affection, erases conjugal love, blots out filial attachment, blights parental hopes, brings down mourning age in sorrow to the grave. It produces weakness, not life. It makes wives widows; children orphans; fathers fiends, and all of them paupers and beggars. It feeds rheumatism, invites cholera, imports pestilence and embraces consumption. It covers the land with idleness, misery, crime. It fills your jails, supplies your almshouses and demands your asylums. It engenders controversies, fosters quarrels and cherishes riots. It crowds your penitentiaries and furnishes victims for your PROHIBITION 33 scaffold. It is the life blood of the gambler, the element of the burglar, the prop of the highwayman and support of the midnight incendiary. It countenances the liar, respects the thief, esteems the blasphemer. It violates obligation, reverences fraud and honors infamy. It defames benevolence, hates love, scorns virtue and slanders innocence. It incites the father to butcher his helpless offspring, helps the husband to massacer his wife and the child to grind the patricidal ax. It burns up men, consumes women, detests life, curses God, despises heaven. It suborns witnesses, nurses perjury, denies the jury box and stains judicial ermine. It degrades the citizen, debases the legislator, dishonors the statesman and disarms the patriot It brings shame, not honor ; misery, not safety ; despair, not hope ; misery, not happiness, and with the malevolence of a fiend it calmly surveys its frightful desolation and unsatiated havoc. It poisons felicity, kills peace, ruins morals, blights confidence, slays repu- tations, and wipes out national honor, then curses the world and laughs at its ruin. It does all that and more. It murders the souL It is the sum of all villainies, the father of all crimes, the mother of all abominations, the devil's best friend and God's worst enemy. Congressional Record. 52:496-7. December 22, 1914. The Hobson Amendment Philip P. Campbell Already the people have voted for the suppression of the traffic in intoxicating liquors covering 76 per cent of the area of the United States, and 57 per cent of the population. The government at Washington has for years prohibited the traffic in intoxicating liquors on Indian reservations and at military reservations and posts, and recently at naval stations and in the navy and all United States soldiers' homes. Twelve years ago the Congress prohibited the sale of intoxi- cating liquors in the Capitol building. Why should any commodity be under the ban of the law to the extent that this already is in the United States? Evidently because the traffic in intoxicating liquors is a bad thing. These are times of great events. Europe has staged, let us hope, the last act in the tragedy of war. Incident to that great tragedy some important things have been done. The czar of Russia, 34 SELECTED ARTICLES ON at the beginning of the war, deemed it important to his empire and to his people that he should have under his control the best physical and mental fiber that his people possessed, and he issued a ukase prohibiting during the continuance of the war traffic in alcoholic liquors. The czar of Russia took this impor- tant action in the face of the fact that the ukase denied to the treasury of the Russian Empire almost a half billion of dollars in revenue on the very threshold of an expensive war. Evi- dently the czar deemed it more important to his empire and his people that he should prosecute the war with men free from the influence of alcoholic liquors than that his treasury should have a half billion dollars a year for the payment of the expenses of the war. France very recently has prohibited the sale of absinthe and other alcoholic liquors during the war. On the 2ist day of November, 1910, William, emperor of Germany, in addressing the naval cadets at Flensburg, said in part: I know very well that pleasure in drinking is an old heritage of the Germans, but we must, by self-discipline, free ourselves from the evil. In the course of my reign of twenty-two years I have observed that of the great number of crimes which have been appealed to me for decision, nine-tenths were due to alcohol. Formerly it used to be considered a smart thing for a youth to take and "carry" a great quantity of alcohol. Those ideas belong to the Thirty Years' War, and not longer fit our times. Naval service demands a height of effort which it is hardly possible to surpass. It is necessary that you be able to endure continual heavy strain without exhaustion in order to be fresh for emergencies. In the next great war . . . nerve power will, decide the victory. Now, the nerves are undermined and endangered from youth up by the use of alcohol. Victory will lie with the nation that uses the smallest amount of alcohol. There- fore do not count the use of alcohol one of your privileges. This is a matter of great importance to our navy and to our people. If you train the troops to renounce alcohol, I shall have sound and sane subjects. The men when they leave the service will carry the thought back to the country. I beg your cooperation in this work. The emperor evidently believed that it was essential to his people that they abstain from the use of intoxicating liquors so that they could serve their country well in war. If mental and physical fiber of the highest order are important in war, they are alike important in peace, for the duties of peace are no less important than those of war. If the emperor of Germany deems PROHIBITION 35 it detrimental to the naval cadets in the service of his navy to use intoxicating liquors, the American people who look well to the peace of their country may likewise take steps to provide for a sober people to engage in the pursuits of peace. It is charged against the liquor traffic that it is responsible for 50 per cent of the crime in the United States; the German emperor says nine-tenths of the crime in Germany. That is a more severe charge than is made by the advocates of prohibition in the United States; but the emperor of Germany makes that assertion that in his empire intoxicating liquor is responsible for nine-tenths of the crime. Anything that is responsible for so great a percentage of crime ought to be prohibited. It is claimed that in the United States the traffic in intoxi- cating liquors is, directly or indirectly, responsible for 25 per cent of the poverty, 37 per cent of the pauperism, 45.8 per cent of child misery, 25 per cent of insanity, 19.5 per cent of divorces, and 50 per cent of the crime. These are grave charges, and their truth has not been denied. Intoxicating liquors cost the American people for the year 1913 almost, if not quite, two and one-half billions of dollars. I ask in all candor what the American people got for that enor- mous sum of money besides poverty, insanity, crime, and misery for women and children? What good did they get? Whom besides the seller was benefited? Today every great railway company in the country prohibits the use of intoxicating liquors by its employees. Recently the industrial enterprises of the country are following in the lead of the railways and are prohibiting the use of intoxicating liquors by their employees. A few days ago the Illinois Steel Corporation posted a notice over the gates leading into the shops serving notice that the employees could choose between the job inside and the use of liquor. There is something so deleterious and detrimental and harmful in the use of intoxicating liquors that it is worthy of the serious consideration of the American people. The question is, Is prohibition of the manufacture, importation, and sale the proper means of saving all the people from the harm that comes from the use of intoxicating liquors by some of the people ? Every other means has been tried. The growth of the use of intoxicating liquors in the United States is alarming. It is said that it fell off hi the last year or two. Well, the consump- 36 SELECTED ARTICLES ON tion of almost everything fell off in the last year or two, but the alarming fact is that there has been an enormous increase in the last half century in the United States in the use of intoxi- cating liquors. Has it benefited the manhood and the woman- hood and the childhood of America? If so, in what respect? Any scourge that caused injury to the livestock belonging to the American people that the liquor traffic caused to the manhod and womanhood and the childhood of America in 1913 would engage 'the serious attention of this Congress and of the country, and steps would be taken for the elimination of such a scourge at any cost. The people will have to make some sacrifice in a pecuniary way in order to rid themselves of this traffic. It pays a tax of nearly half a billion dollars, just about the same amount that the czar of Russia sacrificed when he prohibited the traffic in his empire. Are the American people willing to do in peace what the czar of Russia did on the threshold of war? It is now a question for their serious consideration and for yours. Bliss, W. D. P. New Encyclopedia of Social Reform p. 967 Prohibition Prohibits. William P. F. Ferguson Prohibition, the opposite of permission, is not a synonym of annihilation. Those who say, "prohibition does not prohibit" a self-contradictory proposition mean that prohibition does not annihilate. This is manifestly true of all kinds of prohi- bitions in this world, those of the divine government, of family government, and of civil government alike. Prohibition does not annihilate, not even when it forbids murder, adultery, theft, false witness, and Sunday-work. Prohibition does not define accomplishment, but only the aim and attitude of government toward wrong. License is a purchased truce sometimes a surrender ; prohibition is a decla- ration of war. License is an edict of toleration sometimes a certificate of "good moral character"; prohibition is a procla- mation of outlawry. The first requisite of law is justice. A law that sanctions wrong is not law at all, but legislative crime. It is not "public sentiment," but public conscience, out of which law should be quarried. Law is an educator. Dueling, and smuggling, and liquor selling were once in the "best society." PROHIBITION 37 Gradually the law has made them disreputable. Rum-selling under Prohibition is a sneaking fugitive, like counterfeiting not dead, but disgraced, and so shorn of power. In Maine children grow up without ever seeing a drunken man. In most parts of Kansas and in Iowa, while the Prohi- bition law was in force, the law against the saloon is as effective as the law against the brothel or the burglar. To this fact testify governors, senators, congressmen, pastors, physicians, manufacturers against whose evidence scarcely a witness can be brought in rebuttal except "anonymous." The liquor-dealers' statement that more liquor is consumed under Prohibition than without it is canceled by actions that speak louder than words, by frantic efforts, at great cost, to defeat Prohibition wherever it is proposed. Congressional Record. 52:602-9. December 22, 1914 The Truth About Alcohol. Richmond P. Hobson These convictions are permanent, because they are founded on questions of fact and not of opinion. They revolve about the nature of alcohol, a chemical compound whose properties have been definitely ascertained at the hands of science. Whether members of this House are "wet" or "dry," all should acquaint themselves with the recent findings of science as to what alcohol really is, and the effect it really has upon the human organisms, and through the human organisms the political and social organisms. In other words, Mr. Speaker, the whole question hinges upon the truth about alcohol. The Good Book tells us, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." I assume, Mr. Speaker, that every member in this House will be loyal to the truth when in his own reason and in his own conscience he has found it. Loyalty to the truth is really the true test of a man, whether he is in the image of his Maker and is worthy of that dignity that attaches to human life above the life of the. brute living on the plane of self-preservation. I realize full^well, Mr. Speaker, how with the deceptive properties of alcohol and the powerful financial interests con- nected with it the average man of today has been molded in an atmosphere of error as to its real nature. The educational 38 SELECTED ARTICLES ON effects of. his observation as to the harmful effects of drunken- ness have been partly dissipated by the constant reiteration that the harm comes from the abuse and not the temperate use, the results of which do not appear on the surface. As a matter of fact the effect of the moderate use of alcoholic beverages spread over the whole nation has done and is doing vastly more harm than all the drunkenness and intemperance combined. The substance about which this whole question revolves is a chemical compound of the group of the oxide derivatives of the hydrocarbons, its formula being Calls (OH), 2 atoms of carbon, 6 of hydrogen, and I of oxygen. Among the other members of this group may be mentioned carbolic acid, chloral hydrate popularly called chloral morphine, and strychnine. Alcohol is produced by the process of fermentation, in which process fer- ment germs devour glucose in solution derived from grain, grapes, and other substances, and in their life processes they throw off waste products like other living organisms. One of the waste products is the gas that causes bubbling. The other waste product is the liquid alcohol. Alcohol is then the toxin, the loathsome excretion of a living organism. It comes under the general law governing toxins, namely, the toxin of one form of life is a poison to the form of life that produced it and a poison to every other form of life of a higher order. The ferment germs are single-cell germs the lowest form of life known consequently their toxin, alcohol, is a poison to all forms of life, whether plants, animals, or men a poison to the ele- mental protoplasm out of which all forms of life are constructed. The first scientific finding about alcohol is that "alcohol is a pro- toplasmic poison." An organic substance placed in alcohol is preserved indefinitely, because no living thing neither germs of decomposition nor the ferment germs themselves can penetrate the alcohol. We must therefore surrender all our preconceived ideas about the supposed food value and benefits of alcohol, even in the smallest quantities. As an illustration, one mug of mild beer supposed to be beneficial and helpful will in thirty minutes lower the efficiency of the average soldier 36 per cent in aiming his rifle. Alcohol' has the property of chloroform and ether of pene- trating actually into the nerve fibers themselves, putting the tissues under an anesthetic which prevents pain at first, but PROHIBITION 39 when the anesthetic effect is over discomfort follows throughout the tissues of the whole body, particularly the nervous system, which causes a craving for relief by recourse to the very sub- stance that produced the disturbance. This craving grows directly with the amount and regularity of the drinking. The poisoning attack of alcohol is specially severe in the cortex cerebrum the top part of the brain where resides the center of inhibition, or of will power, causing partial paralysis, which liberates lower activities otherwise held in control, causing a man to be more of a brute, but to imagine that he has been stimulated, when he is really partially paralyzed. This center of inhibition is the seat of the will power, which of necessity declines a little in strength every time partial paralysis takes place. Thus a man is little less of a man after each drink he takes. In this way continued drinking causes a progressive weakening of the will and a progressive growing of the craving, so that after a time, if persisted in, there must come a point where the will power cannot control the craving and the victim is in the grip of the habit. When the drinking begins young the power of the habit becomes overwhelming, and the victim might as well have shackles. It is estimated that there are 5,000,000 heavy drinkers and drunkards in America, and these men might as well have a ball and chain on their ankles, for they are more abject slaves than those black men who were driven by slave drivers. It is vain for us to think that slavery has been abolished. There are nearly twice as many slaves, largely white men, today than there were black men slaves in America at any one time. These victims are driven imperatively to procure their liquor, no matter at what cost. A few thousand brewers and distillers making up the organizations composing the great liquor trust, have a monopoly of the supply, and they therefore own these 5,000,000 slaves and through them they are able to collect $2,500,000,000 cash from the American people every year. In this way nearly two-thirds of all the money in circulation in America in the course of a year passes into the hands of the liquor trust. Very little of the money paid for liquor remains in circula- tion locally, because liquor employs so few men for the capital invested and pays them such poor wages. 40 SELECTED ARTICLES ON Labor unions ought to realize that liquor is their deadliest enemy. It lowers the standard of character and the standard of living of labor. It dissipates the earnings of labor, interferes with savings, and increases the dependence of labor upon the will of capital. It breeds the violence and disorder that often bring labor's cause into disrepute and give the victory to their opponents. In an industrial struggle, as in any other struggle, if both opponents are sober, there is good chance for arbitration. If one side is debauched by liquor, it will lose. The road to solve the problems between capital and labor is to make the whole country dry as the mining regions of Colorado were made dry in the strike. If the capital now invested in liquor were put to useful channels it would employ more than a million and a half additional men, wage-earners, and largely solve the prob- lem of the unemployed. This tremendous increase in the demand for labor would cause a general rise in wages and a corresponding rise in the standard of living. Railroads, armies, manufacturing plants, and other employers of men are rapidly coming to realize the heavy toll of inefficiency and loss of productiveness on the part of men in their employ even from moderate drinking. Scientific management of modern industry in every branch is rapidly coming to demand total abstinence. Investigations in connection with employers' liability for accident and sickness are rapidly disclosing the responsibility of liquor for the bulk of the accidents and the sickness in mines, mills, and shops and other operations. My figures indicate a general loss of efficiency of about 21^/2 per cent for the American producer, on the average. This en- tails an economic loss of over $8,000,000,000 by the nation. As I shall point out in a few moments, liquor causes the premature death of about 700,000 American citizens every year. This entails an economic loss of about five billions. I call attention of members to the charts that show that liquor is causing the bulk of the crime, pauperism, and insanity and, leaving the support of these upon the public, causes a burden in direct taxation upon the American people of nearly two billions. Taking away from our people, as pointed out above, two and one-half billions, the sum total of the economic burden laid upon the shoulders of the nation approximates the total sum of about $16,000,000,000. We call the federal govern- PROHIBITION 41 ment extravagant when it lays a burden of one billion for pur- poses of uplift and we stand by complacently as liquor places a burden of sixteen billions for purposes of degeneracy and de- struction, and there are some so deluded as to imagine that the government should encourage liquor because of the "paltry two hundred and odd millions of revenue. Let no enlightened mem- ber talk about the need of liquor revenues. I say to him what Mr. Gladstone said to the deputation of brewers who made the same claim: Give me a sober people who do not waste their substance on strong drink and I will find ready means of raising the necessary revenues for their government. The liquor trust through its vast hordes of money corrupts our elections, not only to control the results in wet and dry campaigns, but the election of officers and political parties sub- servient to liquor interests. In many wet and dry campaigns bankers have been put under duress and required to notify farmers, merchants, and other business men that they would call in their loans if the elections went dry. The growing degenerate vote directly due to liquor is now menacing not only the elections in our great cities, but in the states that have large cities, and even in the nation itself. Liquor not only creates this degenerate vote, but it also keeps a corrup- tion fund available to purchase that vote, and does not hesitate to spend vast sums for this purpose. In this way it stands with club in hand over politicians and political parties. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the menace of this great blighting influence in our political life, by which our elections cannot be normal and political forces cannot follow in their normal course without cross currents and counter currents. It is vain to hope for honest elections until the country is dry. The liberties and institutions of a free people must depend for their perpetuity upon the average standard of character of the electorate. In America where we have manhood suffrage the degeneracy produced, particularly in big cities, is under- mining the foundations of our institutions. It is this same lowering of the average standard of character of the citizenship in the past that entailed the overthrow of the liberties of Greece and Rome and other republics. It seems rather ironical for liquor men to call upon the name of liberty. Through control of political parties and politicians and from 42 SELECTED ARTICLES ON the supply of needed revenues liquor gets a strangle hold upon the government, and for ages governments have largely looked to liquor to supply revenues and give support for continuance in power. It is a clear sign of the times to note the general change of attitude of the governments of Europe toward liquor. All gov- ernments should now be in full possession of the findings of science as to the real nature of alcohol, consequently when the general war broke out in Europe the governments, though in great need of revenues, promptly took advantage of the powers conferred under martial law to strike liquor a deadly blow. Shortly after the promulgation of martial law the Russian government, in spite of the loss of hundreds of millions in revenue, issued a proclamation to compel prohibition of the national drink vodka. This order has been made permanent and, broadly speaking, the Russian empire is to remain dry forever. The French government likewise issued a proclamation of prohibition of the manufacture and sale of absinthe, and has since extended this to include other distilled liquors. After the proclamation of martial law the German gov- ernment closed down the breweries throughout the empire and has promulgated drastic measures for prohibition in the war zone of the east. When a child is born in Germany the govern- ment sends a card to the mother warning against the deadly nature of alcohol. When a child enters public school in Berlin the Prussian government sends an anti-alcohol card to the father and mother by the child. It seems too bad that the Germans who have cast their lot in America should not have caught the progressive spirit of the fatherland. Eight hundred German scientists, 116 of them professors in German universities, have made a unanimous report on the nature of beverage alcohol, recommending its complete elimination. A German staff physician of the German army has announced that "we should not discuss moderation with a man. The thing has long since been settled by science. The use of narcotic poisons is simply indecent and criminal." It should be a source of humiliation to well-informed Ameri- cans that our government shows no indications of change of attitude toward liquor. Our need for revenue is much less than that of the nations at war, and yet in sections I and 2 of PROHIBITION 43 the revenue bill recently passed we turned to liquor for nearly one-half the total amount, strengthening the hold of liquor upon the finances of the government. Liquor has the same strangle hold upon the throat of our government today that slavery had before 1860. Congress has not permitted the cotton planter to deposit his cotton in bond, but it has done everything for the distiller so he can place his liquor in bond and on these warrants get financial advances. The first finding of science that alcohol is a protoplasmic poison and the second finding that it is an insidious, habit- forming drug, though of great importance, are as unimportant when compared with the third finding, that alcohol degenerates the character of men and tears down their spiritual nature. Like the other members of the group of oxide derivatives of hydrocarbons, alcohol is not only a general poison, but it has a chemical affinity or deadly appetite for certain particular tissues. Strychnine tears down the spinal cord. Alcohol tears down the top part of the brain in a man, attacks certain tissues in an animal, certain cells in a flower. It has been established that whatever the line of a creature's evolution alcohol will attack that line. Every type and every species is evolving in building from generation to generation along some particular line. Man is evolving hi the top part of the brain, the seat of the will power, the seat of the moral senses, and of the spiritual nature, the recognition of right and wrong, the consciousness of God and of duty and of brotherly love and of self-sacrifice. All lif e in the universe is founded upon the principle of evo- lution. Alcohol directly reverses that principle. Man has risen from the savage up through successive steps to the level of the semi-savage, the semi-civilized, and the highly civilized. Liquor promptly degenerates the red man, throws him back into savagery. It will promptly put a tribe on the warpath. Liquor will actually make a brute out of a negro, causing him to commit unnatural crimes. The effect is the same on the white man, though the white man being further evolved it takes longer time to reduce him to the same level. Starting young, however, it does not take a very long time to speedily cause a man in the forefront of civilization to pass through the successive stages and become semi-civilized, semi-savage, savage, and, at last, below the brute. The spiritual nature of man gives dignity to his life above 44 SELECTED ARTICLES ON the life of the brute. It is this spiritual nature of man that makes him in the image of his Maker, so that the Bible referred to man as being a little lower than the angels. It is a tragedy to blight the physical life. No measure can be made of blighting the spiritual life. Nature does not tolerate reversing its evolutionary principle, and proceeds automatically to exterminate any creature, any animal, any race, any species that degenerates. Nature adopts two methods of extermination one to shorten the life, the other to blight the offspring. Alcohol, even in small quantities, attacks all the vital organs and the nervous system, the tissues, and the blood. A large percentage of premature deaths arising from disease are due to this cause. The attack on the blood lowers the efficiency of the white blood corpuscles to destroy the disease germs, exposing the drinker far more than the abstainer to the ravages of con- sumption, pneumonia, typhoid, and other germ diseases. The records of insurance companies show that in the periods from twenty-five to forty-five the mortality of total abstainers is only a fraction of that of the average. This means that the bulk of deaths in young manhood are due to alcohol. It means that people ought not to die in their prime any more than animals. The records of the insurance companies show that a man starting at the age of 20 as a total abstainer lives to the average age of 65, whereas starting at the age of 20 as a moderate drinker he dies at 51, losing over fourteen years, or a cutting down of nearly one-third of his days. Starting at the age of twenty as a heavy drinker a man dies at thirty-five, a sheer loss of two-thirds of the span of his whole life. We are dying at the rate of 1,000 deaths per 61,000 of the population. Total abstainers in our midst are dying at the rate of 560 per 61,000 of the population, though living under the same conditions. The latter figures are those applied to adult males as shown by the insurance companies' figures. Investiga- tions show that the shortening of life of the offspring is far greater and more serious than that of the parent, as I will point out later, and since the adult males are the fathers of the young of both sexes it is on the side of conservatism to apply the proportion to the whole population, so that we can conservatively say that 440 additional deaths are caused every year per 61,000 PROHIBITION 45 of the population deaths that are premature and unnecessary. This means that alcohol actually kills fully 700,000 American citizens every year. When these figures were first printed they were subject to some ridicule and to many attempts to disprove them. Several German scientists have employed the same methods of reasoning, and the liquor interests of the continent have a standing offer of 6,000 marks to any scientist that can disprove the figures of the great insurance companies which are the foundation of this awful conclusion. When the great Titanic sank in mid-ocean with her precious cargo and shocked the whole world, she carried down less than i, 600 souls. Alcohol carries down to a premature grave every day more than 2,000 American souls. Mr. Gladstone in the maturity of his philosophy announced that "strong drink is more destructive than the historic scourges of war, pestilence, and famine combined." The old philosopher was eminently correct. Many battles have been fought in history for which there is no authentic report of the casualty, but of those of which there are records, from the Macedonian war, 300 B.C., down to and including the Russo-Japanese war, the sum total foots up to 2,800,000 killed and wounded, which, being apportioned, would make a little more than 2,100,000 wounded and a little less than 700,000 killed. Bearing in mind the qualify- ing circumstances, it can be generally said, therefore, that alcohol brings to a premature grave more Americans in one year than all the wars of the world, as recorded, have killed on the field of battle in 2,300 years. When the great war in Europe is over it will be found that the sum total killed on the field of battle for all nations will average less than 1,500 a day. Alcohol averages 2,000 Americans a day. Europe is really in the eyes of nature better off today in the midst of her great tragedy than she has been for centuries, because Europe is almost dry. The convention of life insurance presidents recently announced that Russia is saving fully 50,000 lives of her adult males per year from her recent prohibition order, which in at brief period of time will far more than make up for the soldiers killed in battle. No great nation was ever overthrown in war until after its vitality had been undermined by degeneracy arising from alcoholic dissipation. When a soldier falls on the field of battle we all realize the 46 SELECTED ARTICLES ON tragedy, but in reality it is only his physical life that has been snuffed out. The bullet that pierced the brave soldier's heart never touched his character. When his soul rose to appear before its Maker it had no wound. But when the victim is stretched out in premature death from alcohol not only are his heart and other organs and tissues of his body wounded but the ghastly wound is the rent torn in his soul. Civilized nations forbid in warfare the use of flat-nosed bullets that spatter in the flesh and bone. Alcohol uses dum- dums that not only spatter in the flesh and bone but crash into the soul. I realize full well how cruel war is, having had friends of mine among Spanish officers, men who had been kind to me in prison, who had treated me like a brother, mortally wounded, dying in agony. On board the Spanish wrecks shortly after the battle of Santiago I saw the dead men about the decks where they had fallen at their posts of duty. I realized they were brave men and good men, and my soul cried out at the cruelty of their being killed at our hands. I realized not only the cruelty but also the calamity of war, particularly when it over- takes a nation unprepared as our nation is; but if I had to choose one or the other of these two destructive agents, alcohol or war, I would rather see America, sober, stand alone and face the combined world ; I would rather see my country, as defense- less as I know she is, face all the great armies of the world rather than to see this great internal destroyer continue unchecked his deadly ravages throughout our land. Alcohol makes a deadly attack upon the organ of reproduc- tion in both male and female, and upon the nervous system of the little life before birth in the embryonic period. One-half of I per cent of alcohol in solution, such as a future mother might easily have in her circulation in attending a banquet or fashion- able dinner, drinking only wine or beer, will, oft repeated, kill the little life and endanger the life and health of the mother. If both parents are moderate drinkers, drinking but one glass of wine or beer per day at one meal, the effect will more than quadruple the chances of miscarriage of the mother, increasing over 400 per cent the dangers and sufferings in maternity, and will nearly double the percentage of their children that will die the first year in infancy. The children of drinking parents on the whole die off four to fivefold more rapidly than the children of abstaining parents. PROHIBITION 47 This means that scores and scores of thousands of little children die every year from cruel wounds inflicted upon their little lives before they were born at the hands of their parents who did not know. If both parents are alcoholic one child in five of those that do survive will become insane before it is grown. One child in seven will be born deformed. One child in three will become epileptic, hysterical, or feeble-minded. Only one child in six will be normal ; five out of six will be blighted. On the other hand, if both parents are total abstainers, there will be no more dangers and suffering in maternity than in the case of other species; and no matter how hard the lot in life of the parents may be, nine out of ten of their children will be absolutely normal These children normally born will be easy to bring up, and, kept safe from degeneracy in their youth, will tend to rise one degree higher and nobler in character than their parents, following the line of the species evolution. If a family or a nation is sober, nature in its normal course will cause them to rise to a higher civilization. If a family or nation, on the other hand, is debauched by liquor, it must decline and ultimately perish. Rome during long centuries was frugal and abstemious, practicing absolute Prohibition within its walls, and during this period we see the wonderful rise of the Roman Empire. When the Romans gathered into their great city and the youth gave themselves over to dissipation, we see the decline and finally the fall of that great empire. Similarly the other nations and empires of the past have risen only to fall. We are all familiar with thoroughbred races of horses, dogs, and so forth, but who ever heard of a thoroughbred race of men? We know that great aggregates of plants and animals continue to rise, but a great nation is only born to die. Here- tofore a nation has only been able to rise to a certain level, when, gathering in great cities, liquor has overtaken the youth and a great millstone has settled about its neck. Back it sank, never to rise again. We stand in the presence of this most startling discovery of science that alcohol has absolutely disrupted the orderly evolution of the great human species. Science has thus demonstrated that alcohol is a protoplasmic poison, poisoning all living things; that alcohol is a habit- forming drug that shackles millions of our citizens and main- tains slavery in our midst; that it lowers in a fearful way the 48 SELECTED ARTICLES ON standard of efficiency of the nation, reducing enormously the national wealth, entailing startling burdens of taxation, encum- bering the public with the care of crime, pauperism, and insanity; that it corrupts politics and public servants, corrupts the government, corrupts the public morals, lowers terrifically the average standard of character of the citizenship, and under- mines the liberties and institutions of the nation; that it under- mines and blights the home and the family, checks education, attacks the young when they are entitled to protection, under- mines the public health, slaughtering, killing, and wounding our citizens many fold times more than war, pestilence, and famine combined; that it blights the progeny of the nation, flooding the land with a horde of degenerates; that it strikes deadly blows at the life of the nation itself and at the very life of the race, reversing the great evolutionary principles of nature and the purposes of the Almighty. There can be but one verdict, and that is this great destroyer must be destroyed. The time is ripe for fulfilment. The present generation, the generation to which we belong, must cut this millstone of degeneracy from the neck of humanity. What is the remedy for this great organic disease that is nation-wide and world-wide in its blight? Evidently the treat- ment must itself be organic and must itself be nation-wide and world-wide. We can look to nature and find out in what organic treatment consists, for instance, in diseases of the body physical. In the case of a cure for such a disease the cure consists not in the curing of the old disease tissues, but in the growth of young tissue, and the very essence of the cure is to insure that the disease or contagion shall not extend to the young tissue, giving nature an opportunity to grow the cure. The cure of the old drinkers is not nature's cure for such an organic disease. It is not possible by enactment of a law to make old drinkers stop drinking, to change the deep-seated habits of a lifetime. The amendment proposed in this resolu- tion does not undertake to coerce old drinkers or to regulate the use of liquor by the individual. The cure for this disease lies in the stopping of the debauch- ing of the young. Our generation must establish such conditions that hereafter the young will grow up sober. This proposed amendment is scientifically drawn to attain this end. PROHIBITION 49 Upon this all must agree. A man may drink himself, but if he is a good man he would love to see such conditions estab- lished that the young hereafter would grow up sober. I call the attention of members to the chart showing that 68 per cent of all the drunkards had their habits contracted before they were 21, 30 per cent before they were 16, and 7 per cent before they were 12. Less than 2 per cent of men begin to drink after they are grown and settled down. Some vast agent in our midst is systematically teaching the boys to drink and debauching the youth. Who is it that carries on this sinful business? Certainly it is not the drinkers. A man may drink, but unless he is a hopeless degenerate he would not teach boys to drink. I have known many drinkers, but I have never yet known one who made a habit of teaching boys to drink. This sinister agent is the liquor trust of America. Tens of thousands of paid agents all over the land are carry- ing out this devilish work. The most deadly work thus far has been in the cities where it is hard for parents to keep track of their boys, but it extends to towns and is now being system- atically extended to country settlements. The usual method in cities is to operate where boys come together, sometimes having the boys' rendevous in saloons but more frequently in pool rooms and other places of amusement, sometimes on vacant lots. The boot-legger or licensed agent of the liquor trust arranges to have the boys drink before breaking up to be sociable or as a sign of manliness. To better influence the young boy who is just beginning a special drink is prepared called "Cincinnati," which is sweetened to appeal to the boy's taste. In some cases where it is difficult to reach the boys through agents, as for instance in the state of Oklahoma, the liquor trust has written to them giving them numbers so that without the knowledge of their parents, by mail or express, they can ship them liquor free. In order to effectively and scientifically solve this question we must discover and must remove the motive. What is the motive of the liquor trust in this vast debauching of the youth? Some have assumed that the motive is to harm the boys, blight- ing the homes, and degenerating society in general. On this assumption many have set about heaping abuse upon the agents of the great liquor trust. For my part I realize this is not the motive, that most of these agents are in the business to make a living, and that the business has come down in natural courses So SELECTED ARTICLES ON from the past, an occupation for which the whole of society stands responsible. Recognizing this, I have abused none; I have no bitterness ; I have no desire to harm any man's business. Mr. John McCullough, president of the Green River Distilling Co., of Owensboro, Ky., one of the big liquor men of the coun- try, has written to the big men in the business, suggesting that the wise thing to do would be to stop fighting and ask for terms on the basis of being allowed ten years in which to adjust their business and for the government to set aside 10 per cent of the revenue collected from the business every year, and at the end of the ten years for this fund to be used to compensate those engaged in the business when the business is closed. I have no authority to speak for others, but I do not hesitate to say that if such a course were pursued by the liquor trust it would certainly have my sympathetic consideration for statutory adjustment. The South could have received hundreds of millions of dollars for its slaves without war, but when it chose war it could not come back after war and hope to receive a dollar in compensation. The conditions are analogous for the liquor traffic, though liquor has no real legal vested rights, as held by slavery. If liquor continues its barbaric warfare to the bitter end, it need not come asking for compensation. The real motive in teaching the boys to drink is to develop future customers. With a reasonably small outlay the liquor trust can develop this appetite in the young and when the young grow up with an appetite then as men they buy the liquor, over the supply of which the liquor trust has a monopoly. The large profits in the sale of their goods to customers thus developed is the real motive of the great liquor trust in sys- tematically debauching the youth of the nation. The real scientific way to cure this evil therefore is to remove the motive the profits in the sale of the goods. Clearly, this cannot be done by undertaking to coerce those who drink, but it can be done by prohibiting the sale and everything that relates to the sale, particularly to the manufacture for sale. This can be done the more readily as barter and sale for profit have been subject to public control since the earliest days. When the motive is removed and the liquor interests can no longer derive profits from the sale, then the great liquor trust of necessity will disintegrate. The debauching of the young will thus end and the young generation will grow up sober. In this way no effort is made to coerce any citizen. Some PROHIBITION 51 old drinkers desiring to stop will take advantage of the changed environment and stop, and other old drinkers desiring to do so will continue drinking until they die, subject to local or state regulation or control; but when they die no new drinkers will take their place and the next generation will be sober. This method thus takes no chance of invading the sanctity of the home or the liberties of the individuaL Some men may feel that they have an inherent right to drink liquor, but no man will feel that he has a right to sell liquor. The proposed amendment does not touch the question of the use of liquor, and partakes in no manner of the nature of a sumptuary measure. Twelve decisions of the United States Supreme Court have declared that no citizen has an inherent right to sell liquor. What this amendment does is to declare that the liquor trust shall not for petty lucre continue to debauch the young; that neither federal government, nor state, nor any citizens shall fatten upon the weaknesses and miseries of the people. In carrying out the prohibition of the sale, manufacture for sale, and all that relates to sale, the next question that arises is whether the scope of the prohibition should be limited to small units, like the town and the county, or should extend to the large units making it state-wide and nation-wide. It is good to have a town dry rather than wet. It is better to have a county dry rather than wet; but if prohibition is by the small unit, then wet towns and wet counties will be found near by, and the virus there generated will pass over continuously and rein feet the dry town and the dry county. It is a good thing to cut out one root of a cancer, it is a better thing to cut out another root, but as long as a single root remains it will gen- erate the virus and inject it into the circulation and reinfect the whole system. As long as there is one state in the Union that is wet it will be the base of operations and source of supply for the national liquor trust, from which, through interstate commerce, to infect all the other states. Poison generated in any part of the body, projected into the circulation, will reach all parts of the body, and no part can protect itself. The states cannot protect themselves against interstate commerce, nor can Congress delegate to the states this power. The liquor traffic is the most interestate of all business. Their organization is a national organization. It is dealt with by the national gov- ernment. Under our present system limiting Prohibition to small units 52 SELECTED ARTICLES ON the great liquor trust has trampled upon the rights of states, of counties, and of towns, and has taken pride in proclaiming that "prohibition does not prohibit." This pose of the liquor outlaw that he is above the of local law is a complete and conclusive demonstration of the need of a national law. There can be no cure of A, cancer until all the roots have been cut out, until no center^ of contagion are left to reinfect. Local option in various fotyns, and even state-wide Prohibition, though valuable and useful, have not proved adequate. Our whole experience shows thatSProAfttftoft must be national. If Congress, in the exercise of the taxing power, should undertake to establish Prohibition by statute, the great liquor trust would not permanently disintegrate, because what any one Congress can do another Congress can undo. Wet and dry elections would be continually following each other all the time, and the country would be wet part of the time and dry part of the time, and the youth would not have time to grow up sober the remedy would only be superficial. To cure this organic disease we must have recourse to the organic law. The people themselves must act upon this question. A generation must be prevailed upon to place Prohibition in their own constitutional law, and such a generation could be counted upon to keep it in the constitution during its lifetime. The liquor trust of necessity would disintegrate. The youth would grow up sober. The final, scientific conclusion is that we must have constitutional Prohibition, prohibiting only the sale, the manufacture for sale, and everything that pertains to the sale, and invoke the power of both federal and state gov- ernments for enforcement. The resolution is drawn to fill these requirements. American Issue, Ohio Edition, 23:2. June 25, 1915 Labor Would Gain by Prohibition. Irving Fisher The workman should not only not be injured by Prohi- bition, but he would be benefited by the wiping away of all liquor industries. He would be benefited: First, by saving him from the physiological poison of alcohol, thus increasing his working (and therefore producing and earning) capacity. PROHIBITION Second, it would lengthen life and increase the working period of life for workmen. Third, it would save for productive and useful ends the vast amount of grapes and grain which are now worse than wasted. Fourth, it would enable the workmen now engaged in these lines to turn their attention to producing in other more useful and more beneficial directions. At present the men who work in connection with the liquor industries waste their work socially because they render no equivalent to society, but on the contrary, injure society instead. But even the dislocation which would be caused by sweeping away the production of alcohol, is, I believe, much less than the working men imagine, for many of the industries associated with the production of alcohol could be continued without much jar by adapting them to somewhat related lines. One whisky manufacturer, for example, has already put an anchor to wind- ward by producing grape juice, I believe. There are similar examples from other industries. Factories have changed from the manufacture of bicycles to the manufacture of typewriters or automobiles or firearms. Of course, it would be idle, as well as wrong to attempt to convince all workmen directly associated with the production of alcohol that they personally would gain by abolishing the industry. But it ought to be possible to convince workmen as a whole where their interests lie. Personally, I have no doubt as far as labor as a whole is concerned, that those who would be even temporarily injured, would be the negligible percentage, while those who would be permanently injured would be a negligible fraction of I per cent The other 99 per cent would be greatly benefited. Prohibition in Kansas. Statement Issued by Gov. Arthur Capper. March 25, 1915 The National Wholesale Liquor Dealers' Association is cir- culating much literature throughout the country, which is so distinctly misleading and harmful that prompt and forceful repudiation of its contents is imperative. The liquor interests do not fight fairly; they resort to false- hood and innuendo and subterfuge. What else is left to them? Can they defend the gambling, the resorts they own and use to 54 SELECTED ARTICLES ON retail their poison? There is one thing, and one alone, that the liquor interests can do, and that is to wade into the statistical masses of the census, trusting to the confusing power of twisted figures to make black appear white in the eyes of the average man. The liquor interests have declared, in effect, that the legisla- ture of Kansas has lied; that more than 700 editors of Kansas have lied ; that every political party of Kansas has lied ; that every minister and school teacher of Kansas has lied ; that the president of the Kansas State Retailers' Association has lied; that the president of the State Bankers' Association and 166 bankers of Kansas have lied; that the president of the State Medical Society has lied ; that the president of the commercial clubs of Kansas has lied; that the governor of the state of Kansas and many state officials have lied; that 457,000 people who piled a majority on the wet candidate, Mr. Billard, in the last election, and thereby endorsed Prohibition, have lied. Cabell's "Facts about Kansas" Just at present the wholesale liquor dealers are circulating an article by Royal E. Cabell on "Facts about Prohibition in Kansas." Mr. Cabell says that Kansas's death rate figures are unreliable, for "Kansas is not in the registration area." So he takes the death rate of Kansas cities and compares them with the state death rate of license states, and makes no explana- tion that the rate in the latter case is dragged down by rural statistics. Since Mr. Cabell first wrote his article, Kansas has been admitted to the registration area, but the liquor people are still industriously circulating the statement "Kansas figures are not accepted by the United States Government." Cabell infers that Kansas has a rate of death by violence, excluding suicide, of 123. In 1912, according to Dr. J. S. Crum- bine, secretary of the board of health, the rate of violent deaths in Kansas was 60.8, including both accidents and homicides. Mr. Cabell has taken the figures for leading cities and compared them with the figures covering both cities and rural districts in license states. He infers that the rate of suicide in Kansas is 22 to the 100,000. According to the figures of Dr. Crumbine, the rate of suicide in Kansas in 1912 was 12.2. If, in this literature, issued by the liquor men, they want to set forth facts on which intelligent opinion may be formed, why PROHIBITION 55 does it not say in this connection that the death rate in Kansas in connection with all of those causes of death in which alcohol prominently figures is, in nearly every case, below that of nearby states and is in every single case below that of the registration area? Why, for instance, would it not illuminate the problem to say that while the death rate in the registration area from cirrhosis of the liver was 14, in Kansas in 1912 it was only 7? Why not say that while the death rate from violent deaths in in the registration area was 91.2, in Kansas it was 60.8? It might even be well to bring out the fact that while the death rate from homicide in the registration area was 6.6, the homicide rate in Kansas in 1912 was 4.8. It undoubtedly would be instructive to say that the death rate in the registration area from suicide was 16.2, and in Kansas in 1912 was 12.2. The death rate from Bright's disease in the registration area was 87.5, and in Kansas only 554; for pneumonia in the registration area 89.2, and in Kansas in 1912 it was 45.6. Mr. Cabell does not say these things. They contain "the whole truth," and the whole truth would be fatal to Mr. Cabell's cause. Divorce Mr. Cabell figures that Kansas has a divorce rate of 286, but the latest available reports from the United States Government do not agree with him. For the five years, 1898 to 1902 inclu- sive, the rate of divorce in Kansas, according to the United States Government, was 109 (not 286). Divorce statistics are so chaotic and are affected by such varying conditions that it is not possible to make a reasonable comparison, but when Mr. Cabell makes an error of 177 to the 100,000, considerably more than doubling the Kansas rate for purposes of his propaganda, when he carefully refrains from saying that the divorce rate in the Prohibition state of North Dakota is only 88; that in Ari- zona (then license) it was 120; in Arkansas (then license) 136; in Colorado (then license) 158; in Idaho (then license) 120; in Indiana 142; in Montana 167; in Oregon (then license) 134; in Oklahoma (then license) 129; in Wyoming 118; in Texas 131 ; in Washington (then license) 184 when he ignores these significant facts and continues his false figures, there is no reason why he should receive consideration. Mr. Cabell says that fifteen license states have a rate ot 56 SELECTED ARTICLES ON divorce to wives because of husbands' drunkenness lower than the rate in Kansas. But he carefully kicks sand over the important fact that drunkenness is not a cause for divorce in Vermont, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and Texas. Even then, what is the sense in saying that fifteen license states have a lower rate of divorce for drunkenness than Kansas? It simply makes obvious the fact that thirty-two states have a higher rate. In regard to this divorce question, something further should be said. Divorce is not common among foreign-born citizens or among the population of our great industrial centers. Some women accept their daily beating uncomplainingly. In states where the population is largely native American, where women demand consideration on the part of their husbands, a rough tongue-lashing is very apt to result in a divorce. Prisons It is stated in this literature that Kansas has a higher life prisoner rate than twenty-one other states. But it omits the important fact that there is no capital punishment in Kansas. Kansas imprisons its murderers for life ; Illinois punishes them with death. The thing is so obvious as to be ridiculous. We suggest to Mr. Cabell and his employers that they present to the people of the United States these facts : The prison rate in 1910 for the entire United States was 121.4; in Kansas it was 91.1; in North Dakota, another Pro- hibition state, it was 63. In the same year the rate of commit- ments to prison in the United States was 520, and in Kansas it was only 200, while the average rate of the license states in the west north central division, in which Kansas is located, was 465. The following table, showing the rate of commitments to prison in the whole United States, in the division of states in which Kansas is located, and in all the states of that division, brings out the truth in startling fashion: United States 520 Minnesota 499 Missouri 48 1 South Dakota 273 Kansas 200 West North Central (average of license states) 465 Iowa (then license) 585 PROHIBITION 57 North Dakota 163 Nebraska 482 Colorado (then license) 610 Delinquent Juveniles In regard to the question of juvenile delinquency Mr. Cabell says that nineteen states had a lower rate than had Kansas. The fact is that some of these states had no juvenile delinquents at all, because they had no such system. Consequently, they show up much better than Kansas. It also affects the situation that some states that have juvenile delinquency systems have them in an undeveloped state ; some states have an extensive parole system; some states spank the children for offenses that put them in charge in other states. Why should not Mr. Cabell say that North Dakota, a Prohibition state, has the lowest juvenile delinquency rate in the west central division of states? Why should he not say, for instance, that Nebraska, which he compares with Kansas, had a percentage of discharge and parole of 51 as compared with a percentage of 39 in Kansas? These are some of the things that it is necessary for Mr. Cabell and the wholesale liquor dealers to avoid as carefully as a British grainship avoids the glint of a periscope. Pauperism We are told that fourteen states had a lower pauper rate than Kansas. The sentence is not complete or it would read, "and thirty-three have a higher pauper rate than Kansas." Mr. Cabell says that Nebraska has only a slightly higher rate of pauperism than Kansas, but he does not bring out the fact that Nebraska had poorhouses in only 51 out of 92 counties, and that Kansas had poorhouses in 74 out of 105 counties. A complete study of the question of pauperism furnishes one of the most amazing arguments for Prohibition. For instance, if we take all the Prohibition states and all the license states (and they are both so well scattered as to make a comparison fair), 'we find that on the basis of the census of 1910 the paupers in the United States would number: At rate for the continental United States 88,319 Tf the rate in the license states prevailed thruout the country 108,808 If the rate in the Prohibition states prevailed thruout the country 27,309 If the Kansas rate had prevailed thruout the country 22,819 58 SELECTED ARTICLES ON The United States as a whole, according to the figures of the census of 1910, had a poorhouse commitment rate of 96.3. The license states of the Union had a rate of no, and the Pro- hibition states a rate of 29.8. If Mr. Cabell can make anything out of this, let him go to it. Liquor Consumption in Kansas Mr. Cabell says he has been unable to locate any reliable figures in regard to liquor consumption in Kansas. Indeed, he is habitually unable to arrive at the truth or to locate any figures that are complete and correct. With great pleasure we furnish him with the following liquor consumption statistics, the esti- mates being made from reports made to county clerks under the Mahin law : Kansas population 1,690,949 Liquor consumption, gals 6,239,601.81 Paid for liquors $ 5,303,666.04 Paid per capita 3.04 Per capita cost in nation as a whole 21.00 At rate of $21 per capita Kansas would pay 34,509,929.00 Saving due to prohibition 29,206,263.00 We are also very eager to furnish the following figures for Mr. Cabell's discussion. They were secured direct from state officials by the temperance society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and show the discrepancy between the federal licenses and state licenses (or totals of local licenses). As is well known, this difference between federal and state licenses is practically a census of "blind pigs" in any state. The table follows: Number state Number federal Excess federal State licenses licenses licenses Michigan 1 3,983 2 7,939 3,956 Florida 354 1,267 913 New Hampshire 606 855 249 Rhode Island 397 1,552 i,i55 Washington 2,340 3,169 829 Texas 3,ioo 3,336 236 Ohio 5,355 13,299 7,944 Idaho 226 794 568 Kansas 8766 766 1 Both wholesale and retail. 2 Retail only. 8 June 30, 1914. PROHIBITION 59 What the Witnesses Say Let us call the witnesses and see what they think of Prohi- bition in Kansas. If anyone should know, they should know, for they live with it and under it : The governor of Kansas says Prohibition is a great success. Every state official who has spoken out says Prohibition succeeds. More than 700 editors and newspaper men of Kansas, in state convention, unanimously endorsed Prohibition. Every political party in Kansas favors the Prohibition law. No minister has ever opened his mouth in favor of return to license; neither has any school teacher. The president of Kansas retailers says Prohibition pays. The president of the State Bankers' Association believes that Prohibition is a tremendous asset to Kansas. One hundred and sixty-six bankers have filed their testimony in favor of the law with the temperance society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and only six could be found in all the state who doubted the wisdom of this legislation. The president of the Kansas Medical Society believes m Prohibition. The president of the Commercial Clubs of Kansas has said that Prohibition has added real value to every acre of Kansas land. The supreme court has testified in the following strong lan- guage to the benefits of the Prohibition law : The prohibitory law is well enforced thruout the state. It is as gener- ally well enforced as any other criminal law. The enforcement of the law distinctly promotes social welfare and reduces to a minimum economic waste consequent upon the liquor traffic and allied evils. The saloonkeeper and his comrades have been excluded from effective participation in the politics of the state. And to completely settle the question for all time the leg- islature of Kansas, not by a majority, but unanimously, passed the following concurrent resolution at the last session: Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 33, by Senator Kinkel Concerning the Welfare of Kansas Under Prohibition. Whereas, The liquor interests thruout the country, and those allied with them in their nefarious business, are publishing abroad in form of paid advertisements in the newspapers, certain false and defamatory statements 60 SELECTED ARTICLES ON to the effect that prohibition in Kansas has caused increase in crime, death rate, homicide, suicides, divorces, and juvenile delinquents; and, Whereas, The saloon trust is making use of juggled statistics, false- hoods manufactured by criminal interests, allied to the alcohol venders and derogatory statements made by a few unreliable and irresponsible citizens of Kansas, all with the intention of creating prejudice in the minds of the legislators of other state, and thus influencing proposed anti-liquor legisla- tion; and, Whereas, There is a lobby, the members of which profess to be Kansas men, operating in the legislation of the state of Utah, and alleging that evil follows in the train of Prohibition, and that the enforcement of the pro- hibitory law in Kansas has resulted in multiplying crime, and deteriorating all the mental and moral faculties of the people of Kansas; therefore, be it Resolved, By the senate, the house of representatives concurring therein, That all of such charges are libelous and false, and do but represent the sentiments of men who, when this state exiled the saloon, were compelled to leave Kansas for her good. Resolved, That the reverse of these statements is true; that the state of Kansas is cleaner, better, more advanced in mental culture, and stronger in moral fiber and conviction; that her homes are happier and more com- fortable, her children better educated than ever before in her history; that crime is less prevalent and poverty less general; and that all this is due largely to the fact that the saloon is such an outlaw that none of her school children hsve ever seen a saloon, and are unacquainted with the appearance of a saloon keeper; and be it further Resolved, That we, as representatives of the people of Kansas, hereby declare our allegiance to the cause of temperance, sobriety and right living, as exemplified by the ultimate result of constitutional Prohibition, and its enforcement in our midst, and that we are opposed to any return to the domination of intoxicating liquors, and that no proposition looking to a resubmission of the prohibitory amendment, and that no law which has for its object the reestablishment of places for the sale of liquor anywhere in Kansas will be given serious consideration, either by the legislature or by any of its committees. Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be spread upon the Journals of the house "and senate, and that the chief clerk of the house, and the secretary of the senate are directed to send certified copies of this resolu- tion to all states of the union which now have legislatures convened and in session for the enactment of laws. The figures used in this statement are correct and authori- tative. We have avoided nothing, evaded nothing, misconstrued nothing, covered nothing up. Anything further that might be said would simply add to the mass. Let the American people hear the truth and judge. PROHIBITION 61 Report of the Northeast Experiment Farm at Grand Rapids, Minnesota. May, 1909. The Relationship of the Liquor Traffic to Agriculture in Northeastern Minnesota. A. J. McGuire In nearly every village, town and city in northeastern Minne- sota are saloons. The average in number is about one to every 250 population, not of the population of the towns alone, but of the entire population, country and town. Most of these saloons were built up for the lumbering indus- try, those of recent years for the mining industry. The lumbering industry is practically over in the greater part of northeastern Minnesota. The mining industry occupies relatively but a small area. The coming industry of northeastern Minnesota is that of agriculture. It is this industry that will give employment to the greatest number of people, and it is the source from which will come the greatest wealth. The development of agriculture in northeastern Minnesota is yet to be made. Not one-tenth of the entire area is in the hands of actual farmers, not one-tenth of that under cultivation. The task is an enormous one; the clearing of the land, the building of roads, and the drainage of its great swamp areas. But back of this is the assurance of repayment In the first foot of soil is a greater wealth than in all the mines. When under the plow and wisely husbanded the agricultural lands of northeastern Minnesota now unoccupied will provide homes and well paid employment for over a hundred thousand families. The building up of this agriculture, of farming, the rapidity of its development, and the profit of its returns will depend upon the character and industry of the men who engage in it, and not only this, but upon the character and practices of the local government. . Any influence that is not for development, that weakens and thwarts the strength and industry of the working people, or diverts public funds into channels from which no good is derived, that influence has no place in northeastern Minnesota today. Such is the influence of the liquor traffic. It is not denied, but it is believed to bring money to a town. It is believed that 62 SELECTED ARTICLES ON it helps to pay the taxes, that it is the means of securing- money which otherwise would be sent out of the country. The argument that a saloon is a financial aid to a town is commonly used in behalf of the liquor traffic, but it is not true. The only source of wealth to any community, the only abiding prosperity lies in production. The saloon produces absolutely nothing, nothing that is desirable or helpful to any normal man, woman or child. That a saloon is a financial aid to any commuuity has never been proven. That it is a positive detriment may be read on the record books of every county in northeastern Minnesota. Please note the following from the 1908 annual report of one of the leading counties: Expense, district court $i 1,299.00 Expense, justice court 4,211.00 Board of prisoners at county jail 2,198.00 County poor 8,806.00 Total $26,5 14.00 Over 75 per cent of this entire expense was directly due to crimes developed through the influence of the liquor traffic, and through poverty arising from earnings being spent for drink instead of the necessities of life. These $26,000 for the conviction of criminals and the relief of poverty may have been justly expended under the circum- stances, but while we expend so much to run down the unfor- tunate criminal and to relieve the poor, would it not also be well to look into the cause of this horrible catalog of crime and poverty, and to devote some attention to its prevention, rather than so much to its relief? The convicted criminal is a criminal still, and the family whose husband and father is a worthless drunkard finds small solace and but little help from the hand of public charity. It is time a halt was called to this unnatural and unnecessary expense, and from the farmers' standpoint more than any other, for it is against the land that this tax will be largely charged. In some of the counties the land tax has already nearly reached the limit, and for what? Not for roads or bridges, the crying need of the country but for court trials, for the trials of crime, crime that has its origin in the saloon, in the drunken- .ness, idleness, poverty and political degradation that they cause, PROHIBITION 63 saloons built for the so-called "lumber jack" and "miner." "They will spend their money anyway," 'tis said, "so it don't matter." But it has mattered in that the men who have tried to make an honest living, to make their homes here, and to build up the country are now having to pay over $20,000 a year in taxes in a single county for criminal courts, poor houses, and the burial of paupers. That tax is needed for the building of roads and schools, for the development of the country. Remove the liquor traffic and it may be so used. If the only effects of the saloon were in an increased tax it might be borne, but this is only secondary to the waste of time and industry it causes, to the able-bodied men who cease steady employment and become saloon-loafers and tramps, worthless to themselves, a disgrace to their family, and a burden to the public. You see that man in the gutter and you scorn him a worthless drunkard, yet that man a few years ago was on a farm a producer a benefit to the whole community, but through drink he has become what he is. You may put him in jail at the expense of the taxpayers but if that saloon had not been there that man would have been an industrious citizen. We tolerate the saloon for the miserable license it pays, believing it a source of revenue, but no saloon has ever yet created one dollars, but that man the saloon made a drunkard and a pauper was a producer. His labor might have cleared up a farm from which more of the necessities of life could have been produced. Had his money not been spent in the saloon it would have been expended for a better home, for farm machinery, for merchandise. Who will say that such a man is not worth more to a com- munity than the $500 license the saloon buys its existence with? But every saloon in northeastern Minnesota is the ruination of more than one man every year. That miner, had he not been thrown in contact with the saloon would have saved his money and in a few years bought a farm. He Would have become a producer, and his labor on the farm would result hi cheaper and better farm products for the people in town. But you saw only the license money from the saloon as being helpful to the town and you allowed the saloon to poison and 64 SELECTED ARTICLES ON rob him. You got part of his money through the license it is true, but you will pay it back twice over in the results that will follow; the results of a depraved man robbery, murder, court trials, a burdensome tax for the conviction of criminals instead of for the upbuilding of the country. The saloons and their followers have had their way. They have filled the jails and poor houses and the potter's fields, and placed an indebtedness on many sections of the country that will take years to remove. The man in the lumber business did not need to care. He could leave the country when the trees were down, but the farmer is here to stay. The farmer's business is one in which the home and family constitute the foundation. The saloon more than all other evils combined is most disastrous to the home. That farm woman waiting there on the street corner, with faded clothes and a care-worn face, and toil-worn hands repre- sents a home that knows the blighting influence of the saloon. "When," she asked, "are the saloons to be removed from this town? I heard that they were going to be. The timber we once had on the farm and that might have made ois com- fortable my husband spent for liquor, and now he is spending what little we can make on the farm and I don't know what to do." That same cry is in the hearts of hundreds of farm women who came here to the wilderness and have borne its privations and hardships and loneliness and year by year their hopes have died until they "don't know what to do." God forbid that this state of affairs should longer exist. The saloon stands in the way of progressive farming by poisoning the farmer who drinks, and by breaking the heart of his family, by robbing the farmer who doesn't drink through taxation for crime and poverty and in degrading the working men of the woods and mines who otherwise would seek homes on the land through their earnings and become useful citizens. The saloons must go if northeastern Minnesota is to become the prosperous farming section that its rich resources entitle it to be. PROHIBITION 65 Commoner. 15:6-7. May, 1915. The Case Against Alcohol. William Jennings Bryan This is the second central meeting in the interest of total abstinence held under the auspices of the National Abstainers Union, the first being at Philadelphia on the I5th of March last. The organization is non-partisan and non-sectarian, its purpose being to bring all of the people of our country* without regard to politics, church, or race, into active cooperation in behalf of temperance. Before presenting arguments in favor of total abstinence I ask your attention to certain figures and comparisons which will show the enormous amount expended in the United States for intoxicating liquors and therefore the great importance of the subject with which we are dealing. As the body becomes insensible to pain when a certain degree is reached, so the mind ceases to comprehend the meaning of figures beyond a certain point A thousand million, for instance, does not seem to us much more than a hundred million or even a million. I have tried, therefore, to translate into every day language the figures that set forth the cost of intemperance. At Philadelphia I used four comparisons, based upon an ex- penditure of the sum of two and a half billions of dollars a year that is, an average of $25 per capita or $125 per family. The comparisons then used showed (i) that there is daily spent for drink in the United States one-tenth of the sum expended for the carrying on the war now raging in Europe ; (2) that the amount expended for drink in the United States would build six Panama canals each year; (3) that the amount annually spent for drink is more than three times the entire amount spent for education in the United States; and (4) that the amount spent for drink is almost double the annual expenditures of the federal government. I shall tonight present four other comparisons which cannot fail to impress you with the heavy- burden that the use of intox- icating liquor throws upon our population. First: According to the statistics compiled by the depart- ment of commerce, the value of three of the great agricultural crops, on the first of December, 1914, was as follows: Cotton, $520,000,000; wheat, $878,000,000; corn, $1,700,000,000. (These crops vary in value from year to year; in 1913 the cotton crop was worth $825,000,000 and the wheat crop only $610,000,000; I have used the last year.) 66 SELECTED ARTICLES ON Consider the land employed in the raising of cotton, the amount of labor required and the number of persons interested, and then remember that we spend for liquor, each year, more than four cotton crops. Survey the broad wheat fields of our land, estimate the number of persons engaged in the production of this staple of life, and then remember that we expend almost three wheat crops a year for intoxicating liquors. Corn is grown in every state and is the largest single source of wealth; it yields more than the wheat and cotton crops combined, and yet we an- nually spend for liquor nearly 50 per cent more than the value of the entire corn crop. Statistics show that 268,000 manufacturing establishments in this country employ over 6,500,000 wage earners, and that these wage earners add $8,500,000,000 to the value of the material used in industries in which they are employed. They do not receive that sum in wages, but they create that amount of wealth. It gives some idea of the amount spent for liquor to know that during the year we spend for drink more than one-fourth as much as these 6,500,000 wage earners produce. Would not national prosperity be largely increased if the amount spent for drink was expended for food and clothing and homes? Second: As we are all interested in good roads I have made a computation to ascertain how far that amount spent for liquor would go toward the building of good roads in the United States. I find that the average cost of a macadam road, 16 feet wide and 7 inches thick, is about $6,500 per mile. This is the estimate furnished by the office of public roads in the department of agri- culture; but to be sure that we are liberal in our estimate, let us put it at $8,333 per mile or three miles for $25,000. This enables us to make our computation in round numbers. If $25,000 will build three miles of macadam road, then $2,500,000,000 will build 300,000 miles. If we count the distance from ocean to ocean at 3,000 miles, the annual amount spent for drink would build 100 macadam highways across the continent ; and these, counting the width of the country north and south at 1,200 miles, would give us a highway every 12 miles. If, the second year, we built 300,000 miles of highways running north and south we could, in two years have the United States gridironed with macadam roads 12 miles apart so that every citizen would be within 6 miles of a good road, which would put him into communication with every other part of the union. In less than eight years time every PROHIBITION 67 mile of public road in the United States could be macadamized with the amount spent for alcoholic liquors. The amount now expended in paving the road to perdition would, if spent for good roads, soon lift the mud embargo from the entire country. Cal- culate, if you will, the change that would follow the investment of the nation's drink money in paved highways the increase in com- fort to the farmer and his family the increased attractiveness of country life, and the commercial value of these good roads to the towns and cities of the land. Now let us proceed to the third comparison : According to the statistics furnished by the interstate commerce commission the railroads pay out each year to their employees $1,373,422472 or only a little more than one-half the amount expended for alco- holic liquor. Take a railroad map of the United States, trace the lines east and west, north and south, and the diagonal lines, and then estimate the number of men required to operate them the engineers who keep faithful vigil while the passengers sleep the conductors who, ever alert, direct the trains the men who, at the switch, on the road and in the stations, are required for the traffic, passenger and freight this great army receives for this work, indispensable to the nation's prosperity, but a little more than one-half of die amount that is paid for the drink which unfits men for any responsible position. The railroads of the country are capitalized at $20^247,301,257, of which $8,680,759,704 represents capital stock, and $11,566,341,553 represents bonded indebtedness. A considerable portion of this capitalization is water and does not represent actual value; the commission is now at work collecting information as to the physi- cal value of these roads, and we shall know in a few years what it would cost to reproduce them, but, taking them at their book value, it would only require eight years to duplicate these rail- roads if the annual amount spent for liquor was devoted to rail- road building. Does not this comparison give you some idea of the importance of the liquor question to the nation? Fourth: As New York is the financial center of the country and is destined to be the clearing house of the world, you may be more interested in the fourth comparison: The statistics com- piled by the treasury department show that there are 7,581 national banks in the United States with a capital stock oi $1,065,951,505, and a surplus of $726,935,755 or a total capital and a surplus of a little less than $1,800,000,000. Is it not apalling to 68 SELECTED ARTICLES ON think that the amount spent for drink each year would duplicate all the national banks in the country, supply them with their present capital and surplus and then leave a balance of $700,000,000 to be invested in other ways? There are in the United States 19,240 banks other than national that is, state and private banks having a total capital- ization of $1,073,881,738, and a total surplus of $991,147,876; or a total of capital and surplus of a little less than $2,100,000,000. The amount spent for liquor each year would furnish the capital and surplus for these more than nineteen thousand banks, and leave a balance of $400,000,000. In other words, the amount now spent annually for drink would in two years duplicate all the banks of the country, state and national, furnish them with capital and surplus equal to that which they now have, and leave $1,000,000,000 for other invest- ments. Is it not worth while to give some attention to the liquor question? Imagine, if you can, the effect upon the home life of the country if the amount invested in drink were invested in bank stock, and what do you think would be the effect upon business if the capital and surplus of the banks were doubled in two years? If I may now assume that you are sufficiently impressed with the magnitude of the evils of intemperance we may proceed to a discussion of remedies. When we come to consider the liquor question we find that the remedies proposed follow one of two lines namely, moral suasion and legislation. All who labor in the cause of temperance seek to lessen the use of intoxicating liquor some by persuading people not to drink, some by urging laws which will prevent the manufacture and sale of liquor, while still others divide their energies between the two lines of work. As for myself, while I have definite views as to the means that should be employed for solving the legislative problem presented by the liquor traffic, I shall confine myself tonight to the first line of argument, and appeal to those present, and to those whom I may reach through the press, to take their position as individuals on the side of total abstinence ; for whatever difference of opin- ion may exist as to the relative merits of different legislative remedies, no one will deny that the total abstainer, to the extent of his influence, lessens the use of alcohol, and by so doing both reduces the evils of intemperance and lightens the task of the legislator. PROHIBITION 69 Why should the individual abstain entirely from the use of intoxicating liquor as a beverage? That is the pledge which we urge upon each and alL Why? First: Because both experience and investigation show that no advantage of any kind physical, mental or moral is to be gained from die moderate or even occasional use of intoxi- cating liquor. This reason ought in itself to be sufficient, for the intelligent man demands a reason before he undertakes anything which affects his own welfare or his relation to others. If it can- not be shown that the use of alcoholic liquors is beneficial, then the money spent upon it is unwisely spent, for man cannot afford to waste money upon that which does him no good. Second: But the case against alcohol does not, however, rest upon negative arguments. The use of alcohol is distinctly and undeniably harmful; it impairs the strength of the body, even when taken in small quantities; it injuriously affects the mind and it undermines the morals. Scientific investigation has demon- strated beyond the possibility of a doubt that alcohol is a poison and that its introduction into the system weakens man's power to resist disease, and reduces his capacity for intelligent and useful labor. As evidence, I cite the fact that its use is prohibited in schools and that the laws of every state provide severe penalties for the sale of intoxicating liquor to minors. If, by common con- sent, we try to protect the young man from the use of alcohol until he is twenty-one, is not the presumption strongly against the use of alcohol after one reaches maturity? This presumption is supported by the laws forbidding the sale of liquor to drunkards laws unanimously supported by public sentiment. But we are not left to presumption proof is conclusive. The tables of mor- tality of insurance companies show that the use of intoxicating liquor appreciably shortens life. At thirty the expectancy of abstainers is three years and eight months longer than the expec- tancy of the non-abstainers an advantage of II per cent. The man who drinks commits suicide by degrees the rapidity of his decline being proportioned to the amount of alcohol consumed, and what is even worse, he visits his sins upon future generations commits a crime against descendants, those who are both inno- cent and helpless. Drink leads to idleness. The business men of our country are year by year drawing the line more strictly against the use of 70 SELECTED ARTICLES ON alcohol by employees. Why? Because a clear brain and a steady nerve are required in every important avenue of industry, and alcohol befuddles the brain and paralyzes the nerves. No employer cares to put business in the hands of a tippler; the man who drinks cannot safely be trusted with the care of life or property. Read the advertisement in the want columns. Did you ever see an item like this : "Wanted A good moderate drinker for a responsible position." No saloon-keeper would stand sponsor for such an advertisement, for total abstinence is a virtue even behind the bar. There has been a growing disposition in this country and throughout the world, to emphasize the evils of strong drink, but even the most enthusiastic advocates of temperance have been surprised at the ghastly light which the war in Europe has thrown upon the subject. It has been found that patriotism patriotism, that compelling force which throughout the ages has led men to offer their lives for their country is no match for the appetite which alcohol cultivates in its victims. Loyalty to Bacchus, Gam- brinus and Barleycorn, is greater than loyalty to king or kaiser or czar. The use of drink has been found to be so destructive of efficiency, that the belligerent governments, not on moral grounds, but purely on economic grounds, have been compelled to resort to restrictive measures. The aeroplane that drops its bomb from above and the submarine which shoots its torpedo from below are less to be feared than the schooner that crosses the bar. But why talk of the moderate use of alcoholic drinks? There is no fixed line at which drinking ceases to be moderate and be- comes excessive. Every victim of the habit has sought for this line, but he has sought in vain ; like the horizon, it recedes from him as he advances until it finally disappears in the starless night of drunkenness. No one begins to drink with the expectation of yielding to the appetite ; most of the men who have been wrecked by alcohol have had their period of boasting when they pro- claimed their ability to drink or leave it alone at will. It is not safe to trifle with disease, and drinking becomes a disease as soon as the use of it has caused a craving for it. No age is immune from the appetite for alcohol. It fastens itself as readily upon those of advanced years as upon those in youth or in middle life. A physician recently told me of a case in which a man took his first taste of whisky when he was above seventy, and was never PROHIBITION 71 sober again during the remaining four years of his life. Who can defend the taking of such risks as those involved in the use of intoxicating liquor? All history, sacred and profane, warns us against the worship of the bleer-eyed god. "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red} when it giveth its color in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. "At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder." This is the admonition of Solomon. Alcohol still bites it still stings. Surely it is the part of wisdom to "touch not, taste not, and handle not" a thing which, even when used sparingly causes an appreciable loss in health, in strength, and in service; which, when used in so-called moderation, causes wretchedness, cruelty and crime, and which finds its culmination in delirium tremens, the most terrorizing experience through which a human being can pass. But I am not willing to rest the case in favor of total absti- nence entirely upon the ground that one who uses alcohol brings danger upon himself. That argument, while it should be sufficient to deter the prudent man, has in it an element of selfishness. While one is justified in abstaining from that which would re- duce his physical and mental capacity below the maximum, he cannot ignore the effect which his conduct has upon others, and no one in this land and age can be ignorant of the suffering and injustice which alcohol has brought into the home. In cases innumerable the husband has been converted into a beast, and the burden of supporting the family has been thrown upon the wife. In cases without number drink has robbed the children of the guardianship of a father, sometimes even of the affectionate care of a mother, made the coming of the parent a cause of alarm, and changed the smile of welcome into an expression of fear. Neither can we forget the burden that drink throws upon society, first, in decreasing the productive power of wage earners and, second, in imposing a pecuniary burden upon all for the care of those who, through the use of liquor, have been brought to the poorhouse or to the penitentiary. But there is another argument the force of which I feel sure this audience will appreciate, namely, man's responsibility for the example which he sets to others. If one uses intoxicating liquor himself he cannot well advise others against it; at least, he is not apt to do so, for the consciousness of inconsistency puts a restraint upon his tongue. 72 SELECTED ARTICLES ON The signing of the pledge is the outward evidence of an inward resolve which everyone must take who has reached the decision not to drink. If you do not intend to use liquor, why not let your determination help others as well as yourself? Each individual has an influence and that influence is on one side of the line or the other. If one drinks, his influence is necessarily on the side of drinking; if he does not drink, his influence is on the side of total abstinence. Surely the appetite for intoxicants must be strong indeed if it can overcome the natural desire of every good citizen to contribute his mite to so righteous a cause. In several of the belligerent nations the sovereign has announced his abstinence from the use of liquor in order that his example may encourage his subjects to abstain; in this land, where every citizen is a sovereign, why should the individual be less concerned about the influence of his example. The world is aroused to the menace of alcohol war has been declared against it in every civilized land and there is no neutral ground. I call you to the colors to the standard raised by the National Abstainers Union for "Health and Home and Human- ity," Rise! Let us pledge our support to the cause in water in water, the daily need of every living thing. It ascends from the seas, obedient to the summons of the sun, and descending, show- ers blessings upon the earth ; it gives of its sparkling beauty to the fragrant flowers; its alchemy transmutes base clay into golden grain ; it is the canvas upon which the finger of the infinite traces the radiant bow of promise. It is the drink that refreshes and adds no sorrow with it Jehovah looked upon it at Creation's dawn and said "It is good." Pittsburgh Dispatch. September 21, 1914 Prohibition in West Virginia. Fred O. Blue That more real prosperity has come to the masses of West Virginia since it became a dry state July i, than was ever experienced by the state before, was the argument of Fred O. Blue, prohibition commissioner of West Virginia, in an address at Memorial Hall, Sunday afternoon. The first time West Virginia voted on the wet and dry question was in 1888, when only three counties voted dry. In 1912 only three counnties voted wet, and, although the state had PROHIBITION 73 doubled in population in the meantime, there were 3,000 less wet votes in the state than in 1888. "This," said Mr. Blue, "was due to education. Effects of alcohol has been taught in the schools of the state since 1888." "The first thing we did after the amendment had carried," he said, "was to pass a real prohibition law. One of the wets described it as having horns. We did away with the clubs and we did away with the drug stores. No physician in West Vir- ginia can give you a prescription for wine or whisky. They say you can't enforce it I want to say that you can. Our police courts are practically idle. Last week, for the first time in the history of the state, a grand jury adjourned without finding a single offense worthy of indictment "I want to say that Prohibition has not hurt business. Wheel- ing, which was the wettest town in the state, has turned her brewery into a packing house, and it employs three times as many men as it did. In Charleston the brewery has become an ice plant, and we are to have cheaper ice, so that the poor of the city can afford it In Wheeling, where there were fourteen saloons in one block, every place has been rented to another form of industry; some at advanced rents. A shoe dealer located in that block writes that his business has increased 35 per cent since the city has been dry, over a corresponding period when it was wet" Commoner. 15:3. May, 1915 The Question of Compensation. William Jennings Bryan Now that the liquor interests are threatened with the an- nihilation of their business we hear again the argument that they should be compensated for any loss they may suffer as a result of laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liquor. If this came in the form of a proposition, submitted by the liquor interests in return for the voluntary abandonment of their business, it would be more worthy of consideration, but it is not presented as .a basis of agreement and an offer to buy them out would not change the attitude of the representatives of the liquor interests. If they could by any means force the adoption of a provision compelling the public to compensate those driven out of business they would fight Prohibition just the same, and 74 SELECTED ARTICLES ON such concessions to them, being manifestly unjust, would simply alienate the friends of Prohibition without winning support from its enemies. And why should the matter of compensation be considered? Is any liquor dealer ignorant of the character of the business? Does he not know that the liquor business is in a class by itself? Is he not compelled to secure a license before he can open his place of business, and has he not observed the tendency toward increasing taxes upon his business? Is he not required to observe laws forbidding the sale of liquor to drunkards and to minors? Does he not have to give bond for the payment of damages caused? Is he not liable to suit at the hands of those who are injured by his business? Does he not see daily the ruin that liquor causes and does he not, therefore, engage in the business with a full knowledge of the harm that it works to his fellow men? Being under no compulsion to go into the business, and being free to retire from it at any time, he cannot ask immunity from the effects of legislation which the evils incident to his business compel. If any attempt were made to collect from society a sum sufficient to compensate the brewer, the distiller or the saloon- keeper for loss due to the enactment of prohibitory laws a multitude of voices would answer "No!" The public has already paid an enormous penalty for permitting the business to exist so long. Why should society insure the liquor dealer against loss when the liquor dealer has been so indifferent to the loss that he inflicts upon society, individually and as a whole ? How many husbands have been converted into brutes by the use of liquor? Do those who sell the stuff offer to restore the husbands whom they have ruined ? How many homes have been made desolate? Have those who caused this desolation had any thought of making restoration? How many young men have been dragged down to destruction by rum? Do the brewers, the distillers and the saloon-keepers offer to compensate the mothers for the loss of sons could they do so even if they desired? What is a young man worth? What price can be put upon the possibilities of a human life or upon an immortal soul? Have the liquor dealers any intention of repairing the wrong they have done to government and to our institutions by the methods they have employed to prolong their reign of law- lessness ? PROHIBITION 75 He who comes into a court of equity must come with clean hands look at the hands of those who handle alcohol! Is it necessary to purchase the burglar's kit of tools before putting him out of business? It would be scarcely less absurd to talk of allowing the saloon to run until the people are ready to tax themselves to make good this investment in sin and crime. From the time a majority of the members of Congress voted for national Prohibition the saloon business has been an outlaw it was a criminal before. Those who have invested in it can get out of it as best they can and as soon as they can. Such loss as the business may suffer will fall heaviest on those who are either too blind to see the trend of public sentiment, or too indifferent to heed the signs of the times. Vindicator. April 30, 1915 Compensation Somebody is securing a wide publication for an article advo- cating compensation of liquor interests in event of Prohibition, or, more properly, opposing Prohibition upon the ground that it does not provide for compensation. The article ends with the following sentences: Our forefathers in 1773 declared that "taxation without representation is tyranny." In 1915 what term shall we apply to "confiscation without It would be rather difficult to see how the two ideas ex- pressed in these sentences have any relation to each other. The writer of the article in question might have used almost any other sentiment famous in American history to introduce his compensation idea. But, however the question gets before us, what of it? Readers of the Vindicator know that this paper has not been hostile to the compensation idea. On Ac contrary we have believed that, although there is no legal claim which the liquor interests can urge because of which they should be compensated for the loss .which they will suffer by Prohibition, although the character of the business which they have conducted and the style of opposition to reform with which they have sought to continue their business have been such as to properly arouse indignation, if the liquor makers and dealers would sell out, 76 SELECTED ARTICLES ON it would be better and cheaper for the people to buy out the liquor business than to fight through a fight that perhaps must go on for years and leave roots of bitterness to rankle in our national life for generations. In taking this position we stand exactly where Mr. Lincoln stood in regard to the slavery ques- tion. But when the liquor advocates talk about "confiscation" as a basis for compensation they are entirely in error. The Prohibition of the liquor traffic is not confiscation of anything. It is not confiscation because no property is taken from anybody. On the morning after the going in force of a Pro- hibition law, every liquor dealer and maker will wake up in the peaceful possession of every piece of property which he now possesses and every dollar which he now has, no matter how illy gotten, with full lawful right to use them in any lawful enterprise. The only thing of which he will have been deprived is a privilege which he has been enjoying for a longer or shorter time but which, by the very terms of its granting, was always merely a privilege to be terminated or renewed at the pleasure of the grantor. A second consideration is the fact that even possession of the property in this country is conditioned upon the proper use of property. The man who makes use of his property in such fashion as to do damage to his fellow citizens, by such use of it, ceases to have property rights in it. In the light of that fact, even the taking away of the liquor dealer's property which has been used to public damages call it confiscation or what you please, would be an act for which no compensation could be demanded. It is not necessary here to cite the long array of judicial decisions, covering the highest courts of the land for a period of more than fifty years, in confirmation of these statements. As a practical suggestion, we beg to say to the gentlemen who represent the liquor interests that they can vastly improve their presentation of the compensation idea. There is, even yet, some slight possibility that the American people might be per- suaded to do more than justice to the liquor makers and dealers, but the temper of the American people is already pretty thoroughly tried by the long continued lawless opposition of the liquor traffic to the people's will. Nothing will be gained by hurling the idea of compensation as a weapon against Pro- hibition; a frank offer to surrender, with a plea for mercy, PROHIBITION 77 might meet response, but the time for even that is perilously short There is a "confiscation'' that is possible. It is a thinkable thing that the American people win be driven, not only to abolish the liquor traffic, but to take away die vast fortunes that have been piled up from its ill-gotten and bloody gains. Following their present course, the liquor makers and liquor dealers are California Official Argument in Favor of Prohibition, 1914. Samuel W. Odefl. This amendment is proposed by initiative petition procured by the California "Dry" Federation, a non-partisan organization. Voters should enact it for every reason. License or other laws regulating die liquor traffic do not lessen drunkenness or the quantity of liquor consumed, but do make those who vote for them responsible for evU results. The enormous consumption of liquors, resulting in sickness, idiocy, insanity, crime, profligacy and death, puts die issue squarely before our race to go "dry" or die. Science proves that habitual, moderate drinking is as bad as periodical drunkenness. Of ninety-seven children observed who were conceived while parents were partially intoxicated only fourteen were normal Life insurance tables show the fife expectancy of a person of 20 years, if a total abstainer, is 44 years, if a moderate drinker, 31 years, if a hard drinker, 15 years. Three drinks of liquor daily decrease efficiency 5 to 8 per cent. Accidents due to alcohol and employers' liability laws compel employers to hire total abstainers. Healers, physical, spiritual and mental, are hin- dered by alcoholic conditions. Seven hundred and seventy lunatics in our state hospitals in 1912 were registered as alcoholic insane. Half die remainder were so indirectly. (See Eighth Report State Lunacy Commis- sion.) It cost California taxpayers $1,469,667 to maintain these hospitals in 1912, and $29,000,000 to deal with alcoholic crime. Liquor costs the taxpayer seven dollars for every dollar received in taxes or license fees. The Fifteenth Report, Bureau of Labor, shows our courts in two years dealt with 113,526 misdemeanors, of which 66,930 were "drunks" and 20,000 more were kindled 78 SELECTED ARTICLES ON crimes caused indirectly by alcohol. In "wet" towns huge police forces and many courts grind daily grists of crime; in "dry" towns few are needed. Other states show like conditions. Kan- sas under prohibitory laws has many counties without a criminal in jail or an insane person in hospital. Brothels and red-light districts are part of the liquor traffic. This amendment will help business and relieve poverty. Let breweries and distilleries be turned into flour mills. Let barley and corn be turned into beef, poultry or bread instead of liquor. The increased supply will lessen the cost of living. Let wine grapes worth six dollars per ton be substituted by table grapes worth thirty, or dried or turned into grape juice or syrup. Pro- fessor Bioletti says there is a market in the United States for ten times the whole product. Our grapegrowers admit that wine grapes have been unprofit- able, for their hope for future profit lies in the immigration of cheap laborers from Europe through the Panama canal. With pauper labor they hope to profit. (See Vol. II, Bulletin State Commission of Horticulture for 1913.) The liquor traffic is the confessed enemy of American labor. Laboring men do not desire to earn bread from evil business. Immigrants from Europe are generally liquor drinkers. "Dry" the state and turn them elsewhere. This amendment does not interfere with personal liberty. Like laws against opium, cocaine, lotteries, and horseracing, it inter- feres only with personal license. Remove temptation from people of weak or abnormal appetites. One who only drinks occasionally should vote "dry" to save them. The liquor traffic has never benefited any one; it has ruined millions. Voter, it may ruin your son or daughter as it has ruined others. Carefully investigate. Vote "Yes." United States Supreme Court Crowley vs. Christensen, 137 U. S. 89-92, November 10, 1890 It is undoubtedly true that it is the right of every citizen of the United States to pursue any lawful trade or business, under such restrictions as are imposed upon all persons of the same age, sex and condition. But the possession and enjoyment of all rights are subject to such reasonable conditions as may be PROHIBITION 79 deemed by the governing authority of the country essential to the safety, health, peace, good order and morals of the community. Even liberty itself, the greatest of all rights, is not unrestricted license to act according to one's own will. It is only freedom from restraint under conditions essential to the equal enjoyment of the same right by others. It is then liberty regulated by law. The right to acquire, enjoy and dispose of property is declared in the constitutions of several states to be one of the inalienable rights of man. But this declaration is not held to preclude the legislature of any state from passing laws respecting the acqui- sition, enjoyment and disposition of property. What contracts respecting its acquisition and disposition shall be valid and what void or voidable; when they shall be in writing and when they may be made orally, and by what instruments it may be conveyed or mortgaged, are subjects of constant legislation. And as to the enjoyment of property, the rule is general that it must be accom- panied with such limitations as will not impair the equal enjoy- ment by others of their property. Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas is a maxim of universal application. For the pursuit of any lawful trade or business, the law im- poses similar conditions. Regulations respecting them are almost infinite, varying with the nature of the business. Some occupa- tions by the noise made in their pursuit, some by the odors they engender, and some by the dangers accompanying them, require regulations as to the locality in which they shall be conducted. Some by the dangerous character of the articles used, manufac- tured or sold require, also, special qualifications in the parties permitted to use, manufacture or sell them. All this is but com- mon knowledge and would hardly be mentioned were it not for the position often taken, and vehemently pressed, that there is something wrong in principle and objectionable in similar restric- tions when applied to the business of selling by retail, in small quantities, spirituous and intoxicating liquors. It is urged that, as the liquors are used as a beverage, and the injury following them, if taken in excess, is voluntarily inflicted and is confined to the party offending, their sales should be without restrictions, the contention being that what a man shall drink, equally with what he shall eat, is not properly a matter for legislation. There is in this position an assumption of a fact which does not exist, that when the liquors are taken in excess the injuries are confined to the party offending. The injury, it is true, first 8o SELECTED ARTICLES ON falls upon him in his health, which the habit undermines ; in his morals, which it weakens; and in the self-abasement which it creates. But, as it leads to neglect of business and waste of property and general demoralization, it affects those who are immediately connected with and dependent upon him. By the general concurrence of opinion of every civilized and Christian community, there are few sources of crime and misery to society equal to the dramshop, where intoxicating liquors, in small quan- tities, to be drunk at the time, are sold Indiscriminately to all parties applying. The statistics of every state show a greater amount of crime and misery attributable to the use of ardent spirits obtained at these retail liquor saloons than to any other source. The sale of such liquors in this way has therefore been, at all times, by the courts of every state, considered as the proper subject of legislative regulation. Not only may a license be exacted from the keeper of the saloon before a glass of his liquors can be thus disposed of, but restrictions may be imposed as to the class of persons to whom they may be sold, and the hours of the day, and the days of the week, on which the saloons may be opened. Their sale in that form may be absolutely pro- hibited. It is a question of public expediency and public morality, and not of federal law. The police power of the state is fully competent to regulate the business to mitigate its evils or to suppress it entirely. There is no inherent right in a citizen to thus sell intoxicating liquors by retail; it is not a privilege of a citizen of the state or of a citizen of the United States. As it is a business attended with danger to the community it may, as already said, be entirely prohibited, or be permitted under such conditions as will limit to the utmost its evils. The manner and extent of regulation rest in the discretion of the governing au- thority. That authority may vest in such officers as it may deem proper the power of passing upon applications for permission to carry it on, and to issue licenses for that purpose. It is a matter of legislative will only. As in many other cases, the officers may not always exercise the power conferred upon them with wisdom or justice to the parties affected. But that is a matter which does not affect the authority of the state, or one which can be brought under the cognizance of the courts of the United States. PROHIBITION 81 . Independent. 75:25-6. July 3, 19*3 What Prohibition Has Done for Kansas. Charles M. Sheldon So many lies have been told about Prohibition in Kansas that many good people all over the country still believe the law is a failure. With persistent regularity Ac brewers' publi- cations assert that under Prohibition more liquor is consumed in Kansas than under high license, and in the next breath they say that if die fanatical Prohibitionists continue to pass their laws the liquor business will soon be doomed. The Kansas prohibitory law has been a part of our constitu- tion now^for over thirty-two years. After nearly a third of a century of this law die following may honestly be stated as some permanent results : I. In a great majority of the 105 counties of the state the prohibitory law is obeyed and enforced as well as other laws. All laws are broken more or less in all die states. Murders are committed sometimes even in New York, but no one insists on criticizing the law against murder because murders continue. The prohibitory law has always been criticized because it does not absolutely stop every legal sale of liquor. But why should the prohibitory law be expected to do more than any other law does? Based on the same principle as other laws it is fair to say that Prohibition does prohibit in Kansas. This does not mean that you cannot get a drink in Kansas or that there are no places where drink is sold, any more dian it is impossible for a murder to occur in New York, but it does mean that the prohibitory law is regarded as a part of the constitution and accepted by the people generally as the setded policy of the 2. After thirty-two years of Prohibition in Kansas the Honor business ranks with crime and the man who engages in it is regarded as a criminal. There are no respectable brewers in Kansas. A "jomtisr" is in die same class as a horse thief or a burglar. The young men and women of the state would no more plan to make liquor selling their occupation than they would plan to make a living by blowing open safes. 3. As a result of Prohibition in Kansas the habit of social drinking has fatten into disrepute. It is probably safe to say that among the 1,600,000 people in Kansas more men and 82 SELECTED ARTICLES ON women can be found who never touch intoxicating liquor than in any other spot on the globe. The use of liquor at receptions, banquets and festive occa- sions generally is very rare. Even political banquets are so closely watched that it is quite safe to say if any party in power in Kansas today should make a practice of putting even beer on its banquet tables that fact would be an issue big enough to vote the party out of power. 4. Not only is the social use of liquor infrequent and unpopular but the use of liquor as a medicine is fast disappear- ing. I have questioned scores of young and successful doctors and learn that a great majority of them never prescribe liquor for any case whatever. Towns all over Kansas of 2,000 or 3,000 people are common where not a drop of alcohol in any form could be found in case of sickness. The drug stores are not allowed to handle alcohol for any purpose, and as a result it is safe to say a healthier lot of people than the average Kansans could hardly be found anywhere on earth. 5. The result of the prohibitory law has been so educational that practically every newspaper in the state is for the law and its enforcement. Of the more than 800 papers in the state I do not know of one that ever prints any liquor advertisements. During a recent editorial convention held in the state at which 150 editors were present a resolution endorsing Prohibition and praising its results was passed by the editors without a dissent- ing vote. It must be said for the press of Kansas that it was largely responsible for the enactment of the law. The papers joined hands with the churches and temperance organizations to create sentiment and form public opinion. As a result of that stand taken thirty-two years ago Kansas has today a newspaper constituency educated to understand the value of what was then won. 6. The economic results of Prohibition are sometimes cited first as being the most important. They are often demanded by opponents of Prohibition as if the whole principle depended on being able to prove a decrease in taxes or an increase in real estate values. Plenty of economic results of Prohibition in Kansas can be shown to any one who asks for them. The largest per capita wealth is in Kansas today. Kansas contains more people who own their own homes than any other state in the Union. She has the fewest paupers in proportion to her PROHIBITION all that but after all, the greatest and valuable result to the state, ike greatest thing that Prohibition has done for Kansas, is to establish the conviction with the young generation that the entire Honor business is an iniquity and an evil without one redeeming quality, and that it is the business of dv&xed men and women to rub it off the map of the world. liquor into Prohibition states, has already proved the greatest help to local enforcement. The Mahin law, passed by die Kansas legislature and based on the Webb hul, has resulted in freight shipments in some localities down to a minimum, so that instead of trying to run a joint, law breakers are now reduced to going to Kansas City with an empty suit case and bringing it back full of whisky or beer. And when a saloon is reduced to the limits of a suit case by the rigor of a law, it win soon have no visible means of support. If any reader of the Independent is doubtful about conditions in Kansas and still thinks that Prohibition does not prohibit, or that the law is not enforced, I will pay his hotel bills in Topeka for a week if after an honest investigation of conditions in Topeka he is convinced that the law in the capital city of Kansas is a failure. Congressional Record. 52:495-616. December 22, 1914. Prohibition in Kansas. John R Connelly I feel personally that there has never come and can never come any lasting good to us as a people either from the manufacture or the sale of intoxicating liquors. I want in this matter and in all other matters that come up for consideration here, and upon which men may honestly differ, to exercise that charity for the opinions of others that I would desire that they should exercise for the opinions that are mine. I have never known a man who was intolerant in his opinions whom I would care to follow or for whom I could have a lasting respect. I am proud of die fact that I come from a state that has for more man a third of a century embraced in its fundamental law a provision mat forbade the manufacture or sale of intoxi- cating liquors. I shall not come to you today and say that the driving of the liquor traffic from a state will solve all the 84 SELECTED ARTICLES ON ills that humans are heir to. Not all the ills of humanity are due either to the manufacture or sale of intoxicating liquors. If this resolution should carry and the requisite number of states ratify it to make it binding on all the states of the Union, there would still be questions to solve that would require the best thought of the best men and women of the land to find a solution for. But, Mr. Chairman, while I do not contend that liquor is the basis of all evil, I am convinced that no permanent or lasting good can come to a people either from the manufacture of or the traffic in an article that brings benefit to none and brings harm to so many. Feeling this way about it I shall not hesitate to cast my vote for this resolution. I have heard some contend that Prohibition is a failure in the states that have tried it, and it is of this that I desire to address my few remarks today. There is not an argument of the opponents to Prohibition in states where it has been tried that will, in my opinion, stand the test of reason. There is no evidence anywhere that Prohibition has been a failure in the state of Kansas. I have heard some contend that there is more liquor consumed in states having Prohibition than there is in states which do not have it. If that statement needed any argument to refute it, the argument could be found in the bitter fight that the liquor interests make against Prohibition everywhere, and no one is ready to believe that they are anxious to curtail their output or reduce the consumption of their commodity. I know that no fair man who is informed will contend that the law has increased the consumption of liquor in the state that I am proud to call my home. In Kansas we have a law which requires the agents of common carriers, such as the railroad and express companies, to furnish the names of the consignee and the amount con- signed to the county clerk of each county, and I am persuaded that these companies are very careful to obey this law. This gives a very accurate accounting of the amount of liquor con- sumed in the state. By this record we find that the amount of intoxicating liquors shipped into the state last year averaged less than $1.50 for each adult male citizen of the state, while other states have an average of $30 per capita. Kansas is not ashamed of her prohibitory law nor of the progress that she has made in that third of a century which this has been a part of the fundamental law of the land. She PROHIBITION 85 has Prohibition, and along with it she has some other things that her citizens, no matter where you find them, are proud to enumerate. She has but half the population of Missouri and has twice the number of students in her state university. She has more than twice the population of Colorado, and she has fewer prisoners in her state penitentiary. She has twenty-nine counties without an inmate in a poor- house and eighteen counties without a poorhouse. Her entire state debt is less than 20 cents for each man, woman and child, and she has half that amount laid away in her vaults in cash, waiting for the debt to come due. Her agricultural and livestock crop alone this year will reach the stupendous sum of $620,000,000. Last year she sold over $25,000,000 worth of eggs and butter, and this year she raised 160,000,000 bushels of wheat While she spent less than $1.50 last year for liquor per capita, she spent over $15,000,000 to educate the 400,000 boys and girls that wend their way to the common schools of that great com- monwealth. The state of Kansas is not ashamed of the fact that 80 per cent of these boys and girls never saw a saloon or a place where intoxicating liquors were legally sold. Kansas comes to you today with no apologies for those laws that you who are not in sympathy with Prohibition are pleased to term sumptuary laws. On the 3d day of last November her citizens, men and women, to the number of 528,000, went to the polls and cast a ballot for governor, and only I out of every n voted for the candidate on a resubmission platform. We of Kansas, where the storm over Prohibition has ceased to rage, have met and in our honest opinion defeated every contention as to the abolishing the sale and manufacture of liquor, bringing want and squalor to the threshold of the labor- ing man. We have tried it, and we know that it is not true. Our laboring men and our business men have long since ceased to contend that the man who spends 40 cents out of every dollar that he earns over the bar for strong drink thereby helps him- self or helps legitimate business of every kind. We know that every dollar that goes for strong drink is just one dollar less with which to buy food and raiment that adds to the happiness of himself and his family. 86 SELECTED ARTICLES ON A folder sent out by some one who is interested in the defeat of this resolution came to my notice a day or so ago, which says that if you legislate to do away with the jobs of the fellows who work in the breweries and the distilleries it will cause these men great hardship, and they will not be able to support their families and buy their share of the food and clothing that is necessary for them. This is a very legitimate argument were it sound, but to our mind it is by no means unanswerable. It may for a time make a little readjustment necessary, but if the money that men spend for drink was spent for additional food and clothing it would create an additional demand for these articles which would demand additional labor in their produc- tion, and the man who is now employed in these industries would find that his services were in demand in other and in our opinion more fruitful lines. In the transitory period from high license to enforced Pro- hibition in Kansas many towns with 2,000 inhabitants allowed, through a system of fines, which amounted to high license, the running of places where liquor was sold. It was necessary so long as these "blind tigers" were tolerated to have a considerable police force, and to many of them it never occurred that with the driving out of the saloon would go the necessity of much of their police protection. These places were allowed to run in some places because the business men thought the revenue to pay all this police force would necessarily be placed upon them, and they were willing to tolerate the saloon in order, as they thought, to escape the tax. Later, when public sentiment demanded a better enforcement of the law, they in many instances found that with the going of the "blind tiger" there went also much of the necessity for additional expense. It is not an unknown thing in Kansas today to see towns of 2,000 people where once three police officers were thought to be neces- sary now getting along with one, and this one finds his duties limited largely to supervising street improvement, moving the garbage from the back alleys, and enforcing the ordinance prohibiting chickens and pigs from running at large. Today we issue this challenge and feel free in so doing: We dare you to find a community in the state of Kansas where the abolishing of the sale and manufacture of liquor has permanently increased the taxes raised in other ways, where it PROHIBITION 87 has increased the crime in the community or contention among its citizens, where it has increased want and misery among her people or has made it more difficult for men to reap a recom- pense for their honest endeavor. I know little about the work- ings of Prohibition elsewhere, but when those who, are opposed to the principle desire to point out a place where Prohibition has been a failure you must leave Kansas out of your calcu- lations. You who are here today honest in the belief that you should defeat this measure should understand that you are standing at the ocean's ledge fighting to beat back the tide that is sure to engulf you. You perhaps may defeat it today, but you can hardly hope to make your victory a permanent one, for some- where and somehow there will always come enough recruits to every cause which involves the highest ideals of a free people to beat down the battlements of wrong. I am glad to speak today for the splendid commonwealth of Prohibition, Kansas. A half million boys and girls tread her highways who never saw a place where liquor was legally sold and a hundred thousand of them never saw a drunken man nor do they know the taste of liquor. The older generations are not entirely free from the baneful effects of the liquor habit; but from the loins of that mighty people there is coming into maturity a new generation free from the tyranny of its hurtful reign. May it please God that with the coming of another generation we may not only appreciate the benign influence of state-wide Prohibition, but may we hope that glad day will find no place where a licensed grogshop may find lodgment under the protecting folds of the national flag. For this we dare to hope, for this we dare to pray, for this we dare to vote. Report of the President's Homes Commission, p. 236. Total Alcoholic Drink Bill Bringing together the quantities of liquors consumed, esti- mated at the retail cost on the basis of previous reports, it is shown that the American people spent for alcoholic stimulants for the year ending June 30, 1907 : 88 SELECTED ARTICLES ON I Beer ....................................... $ 843,333,829 Whisky (exclusive of quantity used in arts) ... 118,456,091 Grand total, 1907 ........................... ,466,544,327 1906 ........................... ,450,855,448 1905 ............................ 325,439,074 1904 ........................... ,277,727,190 1903 ........................... ,242,943,118 1902 ........................... ,172,565,235 1901 ........................... ,094,644,155 1900 ........................... ,059,563,787 1899 ........................... 973,589,080 We must leave to students of social economy the question of a great nation spending an average of over one and one-half billions annually for stimulating beverages ; a sum about as great as the appropriations of the congress for a session. Nearly double as much per capita is spent for tirink as is spent for the maintenance of public schools. It nearly equals the value of exports of merchandise per capita. It is double the amount of the public debt. It is more than the farm value of the corn crop, which exceeds 2,500,000,000 bushels ; three times the value of the wheat grown; more than double the worth of the cotton crop. The indirect cost is beyond estimate, and so great is the waste and misery created that states are fighting the evil and endeavor- ing to banish the saloon as a distributing factor. It is easily the foremost question of the day, and places the support of a big navy or army in the shade. Brief Excerpts Alcoholism in either of the parents is one of the most fruitful causes of crime in the child.* Havelock Ellis in "The Criminal" P. 97. The baleful influence of alcohol is one of the best known and most transparent causes of crime. Prof. Aschaffenburg in "Crime and Its Repression," p. 69. All labor expended in producing strong drink is utterly un- productive; it adds nothing to the wealth of the community. Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations." If I could, I would inaugurate a strike that would drive the liquor traffic from the face of the earth. The late P. M. Arthur, Grand Chief of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. The history of heredity conducts us to alcoholism, and these PROHIBITION 89 two should be considered the principal causes of degeneration. Dr. Jules Morel in American Journal of Sociology. 5 : 81. //. '99. The liquor traffic is responsible for nine-tenths of the misery among the working classes, and the abolition of that traffic would be the greatest blessing that could come to them. Terence V. Powderly. It is likely that alcohol, as a predisposing or as an immediate cause, is responsible for more than a third of all admissions to our hospitals for the insane. Dr. Rosenau in "Preventive Medi- cine and Hygiene" p. 301. Massachusetts prison statistics show that 96 per cent of all criminals in our prisons in 1912 were intemperate by habit. From the Report of the Commission to Investigate Drunkenness in Massachusetts, January, 1914, p. 10. Nothing could show more clearly what gives the immediate impulse to assault and battery than the fact that two-thirds of all fights take place in, or in front of, a public house. Prof. Aschaffenburg in "Crime and Its Repression," p. 79. Neal Dow quotes William E. Gladstone as saying, "We have suffered more in our time from intemperance than from war, pestilence, and famine combined those three great scourges of mankind." North American Review. 139 : 179. Aug. '84. Prohibition, or at least limiting the manufacture of intoxi- cating liquors is not only a simple and efficacious means of curb- ing intemperance in the people, but it is the only way it can be done. Prof. Guglielmo Ferrero in Pittsburgh Post, May 23, '15. A careful scientist has called alcohol the indispensable vehicle of the business transacted by the white slave traders, and has asserted that without its use this trade could not long endure. Jane Addams, tn "A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil," p. 188. It is unquestioned that, in most countries, the worst sunt inflicted upon women, children, and dumb animals are perpetrated under the influence of strong drink, for this is provocative of both cruelty and lust. William Tattack in "Penological Princi- ples," p. 296. In the year 1834 a Parliamentary Committee on Intemperance reported that the national loss of productive labor through intem- perance amounted to 50,000,000 per annum, and was equal to the loss of one day's labor in six. John Newton in ''Our National Drink Bill," p. 115. 90 SELECTED ARTICLES ON If I could have my way, I would wipe out every saloon. The saloon is the prolific source of nine-tenths of the misery, wretch- edness, and crime, and is, more than we know, responsible for the social evil. Rev. Charles H. Parkhurst, as quoted in New York Voice, January 16, 1896. Hitherto whisky and brandy have figured officially as "drugs" in the U. S. Pharmacopoeia, which is the authoritative list of medicinal preparations recognized by physicians. This list is now in process of revision, and the committee in charge have voted to remove whisky and brandy from it. Literary Digest 51 : 246. Ag. 7, '15. Intemperance is a proximate cause of a very large proportion of the crime committed in America. Fully three-fourths of all the prisoners with whom I have personally conversed in different parts of the country admitted that they were addicted to an ex- cessive use of alcoholic liquors. E. C. Wines in "State of Prisons," p. 113. We are fighting Germany, Austria, and drink, and so far as I can see the greatest of these three deadly foes is drink. I have a growing conviction, based on accumulating evidence, that noth- ing but root and branch methods would be of the slightest avail in dealing with the evil. David Lloyd-George, quoted in Amer- ican newspapers, Mr. 30, '15. The strongest indictment against alcohol is that it excites the passions and at the same time diminishes the will power. The fact that alcohol lowers moral tone does much more harm than all the cirrhotic livers, hardened arteries, shrunken kidneys, in- flamed stomachs, and other lesions believed to be caused by its excessive use. Dr. Rosenau in "Preventive Medicine and Hy- giene, p. 58. We have attributed the abnormal increase of criminality and pauperism in the United States largely to an increase of intem- perance. Alcoholic drink is estimated to be the direct or indirect cause of 75 per cent of all the crimes committed, and of at least 50 per cent of all the sufferings endured on account of poverty, in this country and among civilized nations. H. M. Boise in "Prisoners and Paupers," />. 137. Prohibition is not a new rule although from the nature of things, it is the only one which can result in prevention and destroy the traffic. Its imperfect application is the only possible reason for failure, and it is singular reasoning which demands PROHIBITION 91 the abandonment of die best remedy in disease because it has not been administered to the patient. Senator Henry W. Blair in "Tke Temperance Movement," p. 560. The result of medical inspection in the schools of New York has revealed die fact that 53 per cent of the children of iliuhuft parents are "dullards," as compared with 10 per cent of the chil- dren of abstainers. Researches on animals which had small quantities of alcohol administered in their food prove decisively that die hereditary factor in alcoholism is not imaginary. >r. Bryce in "The Laws of Life and Health," p. 105. The committee finds that the chief direct cause of the down- fall of women and girls is the close connection between alcoholic drink and commercialized vice. Women obtain liquor in palm gardens, wine rooms, saloons, and dance halls. To these places they are frequently taken by their companions and given liquor until their senses are deadened, after which die evfl design sought is accomplished. After the first offaae the career of a woman is apt to fee downward at a rapid rate. Report of the Wisconsin Vice Committee (1914), p. 98. In the Commission's consideration and investigation of the social evil, it found as die most conspicuous and important de- ment in connection with the r ir, next to the house of prostitu- tion itself, was the saloon, and the most important financial inter- est, next to the business of prostitution was the liquor interest. As a contributory influence to immorality and the business of prostitution there is no interest so dangerous and so powerful in the city of Chicago. The Social Evil in Chicago [Report of the Vice Commission of Chicago, 1911]. p. 119. Twenty per cent of all cases of umail>, and more than h If of the cases of suicide, owe their origin to alcohol. Where -he use of alcohol is prohibited the number of arrests for crim : at once falls. During the recent terrible earthquake at San Fran- cisco all places for the sale of alcohol were closed, and, despite the prevailing conditions of social anarchy, the average daily number of arrests for crime was only three. The very day the saloons were opened no less than seventy people were arrested, and this number was much increased on subsequent days. AT. Alexander Bryce in "The Laws of life and Health," p. 105. The liquor franks are excited because the anti-booze agi- tation threatens "properties valued in the aggregate at perhaps $2,000,000,000." It may comfort them to reflect that this "per- 92 PROHIBITION haps" total of theirs is almost exactly one ninety-fourth of the estimated wealth of the United States. But it causes an alto- gether disproportionate part of the total crime, disease, suffering, and waste with which our country is afflicted. The rest of us pay mighty heavy taxes in all these ways to keep up their "values." Booze wealth is the most selfish, tyrannous, and wooden-headed form of property known to our civilization, and it ought to be possible to scale its fraction down (and out) with perfect safety and great gain. Why should a minor interest be a major nuisance? Editorial. Collier's Weekly. 54: 14 //. 3, '15. NEGATIVE DISCUSSION McClure's Magazine. 31: 438-44- August, 1908. Prohibition and Social Psychology. Hugo Munsterberg. If a German stands up to talk about Prohibition, he might just as well sit down at once, for every one in America, of course, knows beforehand what he is going to say. Worse, every one knows also exactly why he is so anxious to say it: how can he help being on the wrong side of this question? And especially if he has been a student in Germany, he will have brought the drinking habit along with him from the Fatherland, together with his cigar smoking and card playing and duelling. If a poor man relies on his five quarts of heavy Munich beer a day, how can he ever feel happy if he is threatened with no license in his town and with no beer in his stein? Yet my case seems slightly differ- ent. I never in my life played cards, I never fought a duel, and when the other day in a large women's college, after an address and a reception, the lady president wanted to comfort me and suggested that I go into the next room and smoke a cigar, I told her frankly that I could do it if it were the rule in her college, but that it would be my first cigar. With beer it is different: Last winter in traveling I was for some days the guest of an Episcopal clergyman, who, anticipating the visit of a German, had set up a bottle of excellent beer as a welcome, and we drank together the larger part of the bottle but I think that is my only case in late years. When I had to attend a Students' "Commers," I was always protected by the thick mug through which no one could discover that the contents never became less during the evening. I live most comfortably in a pleasant temperance town which will, I hope, vote no-license year by year as long as fresh- men stroll over the old Harvard Yard. And although I have become pretty much Americanized I have never drunk a cocktail. The problem of Prohibition, thus, does not affect my thirst, but it greatly interests my scientific conscience ; not as a German, but as a psychologist I feel impelled to add a word to the dis- 94 SELECTED ARTICLES ON cussion which is suddenly reverberating over the whole country. But is it really a discussion which we hear? Is it not rather a one-sided denunciation of alcohol, repeated a million times with louder and louder voice, an outcry ever swelling in its vehe- mence? On the other side there may be the protests of the dis- tillers and brewers and wine-growers and bottle-makers and saloon-keepers, and perhaps some timid declarations of thirsty societies but such protests do not count, since they have all the earmarks of selfishness; they are ruled out, and no one listens, just as no one would consult the thieves if a new statute against pickpockets were planned. So far as the really disinterested pub- lic is concerned, the discussion is essentially one-sided. If serious men like Cardinal Gibbons raise their voices in a warning against Prohibition, they are denounced and overborne, and no one cares to imitate them. The Fundamental Evil of American Public Opinion It has been seldom indeed that the fundamental evil of Amer- ican public opinion has come out so clearly; namely, that no one dares to be on the unpopular side; just as in fashion and social life, every one wants to be "in it." No problem has in America a fair hearing as soon as one side has become the fashion of mind. Only the cranks come out with an unbalanced, exagger- ated opposition and thus really help the cause they want to fight against. The well-balanced thinkers keep quiet and simply look on while the movement rushes forward, waiting quietly for the reaction which sets in from the inner absurdity of every social extreme. The result is too often an hysterical zig-zag movement, where fearlessness might have found a middle way of steady progress. There must be indeed a possible middle way between the evil of the present saloon and the not lesser evil of a future national Prohibition; yet if this one-sidedness of discussion goes on, it is not difficult to foresee, after the legislative experiences of the last year, that the hysterical movement will not stop until Prohibition is proclaimed from every statehouse between the Atlantic and the Pacific. Exaggerated denunciation of the Prohibition movement is, of course, ineffective. Whoever simply takes sides with the saloon- keeper and his clientele yes, whoever is blind to the colossal harm which alcohol has brought and is now bringing to the whole country is unfit to be heard by those who have the healthy and PROHIBITION 55 sound development of the nation at heart. The evils which are connected with the drinking habit are gigantic; riwwg^tiH^ of tires and many more thousands of households are the victims every year; disease and poverty and crime grow op where alco- hol drenches die soiL To deny it means to ignore the teachings of medicine and economics and criminology. But is this undeniable fact really a proof of the wisdom of Prohibition? The railroads of the United States injured last year more than loogooo persons and put out 7,000 hopeful fives ; does any sane man argue that we ought to abolish railroads? The stock exchange has brought in the last year economic misery to uncounted homes, but even at the height of the panic no one wanted to destroy the market for industrial stocks. How much crime and disaster and disease and ruin have come into the fives of American youth through women, and yet who doubts that women are the blessing of the whole national fife? To say that certain evils come from a certain source suggests only to fools the hasty annihilation of the source before studying whether greater evils might not result from its destruction, and without asking whether die evils might not be reduced, and the good from die same source remain untouched and nn tampered with. Even if a hollow tooth aches, the modern dentist does not think of pulling it ; that would be the remedy of the clumsy village bar- ber. The evils of drink exist, and to neglect their cure would be criminal, but to rush on to the conclusion that every vimjaid ought therefore to be devastated is unworthy of the logic of a self-governing nation. The other side has first to show its case. "Better England Free Than England Sober r This does not mean that every argument of the other side is valid. In most of the public protestations, especially from die Middle West, far too much is made of the claim that all die Puritanic laws and the whole prohibitionist movement are an interference with personal liberty. It is an old argument, indeed, "Better England free than England sober." For public meetings it is just the kind of protest which resounds well and rolls on nobly. We are at once in die midst of the "most sacred" rights. Who desires diat America, the idol of those who seek freedom from die tyranny of the old world, shall trample on die right of personal liberty? And yet those hundreds of singing-societies have joined in this outburst of moral imBtpmiimi have 96 SELECTED ARTICLES ON forgotten that every law is a limitation of personal liberty. The demand of the nation must limit the demands of the individual, even if it be not the neighbor, but the actor himself who is directly hurt. No one wants to see the lottery, gambling-houses or free sale of morphine and cocaine permitted, or slavery, even though a man were to offer himself for sale, or polygamy, even though all wives should consent. To prevent temptation toward ruinous activities is truly the state's best right, and no injury to personal liberty. The German reflects gladly how much more the German state apparently intrudes upon personal freedom : for instance, in its splendid state insurance for old age and accidents. To be sure, from this German viewpoint it is hard to under- stand why the right of the state to subordinate personal wishes to national ones should not carry with it a duty to make com- pensation. To him the actions of some southern states appear simply as the confiscation of property. When, as has happened, a captain of industry erects, for instance, a most costly brewery, and the state in the following year prohibits the sale of beer, turning the large, new establishment into a huge, useless ruin, without giving the slightest compensation, the foreigner stands aghast, wondering if tomorrow a party which believes in the state ownership of railroads may not prohibit railroading by private companies without any payment to the present owners. Yet the political aspect does not concern the social psycholo- gist. I abstract from it as from many others. There is, indeed, no limit to the problems which ought to be studied more seriously before such a gigantic revolution is organized. The physician may ask whether and when alcohol is real medicine, and the physiologist may study whether it is a food and whether it is rightly taken as helpful to nutrition ; but this is not our problem. The theologians may quarrel as to whether the Bible praises the wine or condemns the drinker, whether Christ really turned water into that which we call wine, and whether Christianity as such stands for abstinence. It is matter for the economist to ask what will become of the hundred thousands of men who are working today in the breweries and related industries. A labor union claims that "over half a million men would be thrown out of employment by general Prohibition, who, with their families, would make an army of a million human beings robbed of their means of existence." And the economist, again, may consider what it might mean to take out the license taxes from the city PROHIBITION' ad the hundreds of mflfions of the budget of the whole country. It is claimed that the brewers, maltsters, and distillers pay out for natural and products, for labor, transportation, etc, tfcaf their iggiC4S4lc investments foot up to more than three thousand miffioos; and that their taxes contribute $550^000^000 every year to the public treasuries. Can the country afford to cannot be solved in the Carrie Nation style: yet they are ours here. The Lonely Drinker of tike Temperance Town Nearer to our psychological interest comes the war-cry, "Prohibition does not prohibit.'* It is too late in the day to need to prove it by statistics : every one UHJWS it. No one has traveled in Prohibition states who has not seen the sickening sight of drunkards of the worst order. The drug-stores are tnmfi into *eiv remunerative bars, and through hidden chan- nels whisky and gin flood the community. The figures of the United States Commissioner of Internal Revenue tefl the story publicly. In a license state like Massachusetts, there exists one retail liquor dealer for ceM_y 525 of population; in a Prohibition one for every 366. But the secret story is much What is the effect? As far as the health of the its mental training in self-control and in of desires