AMERICA AND THE DRINK QUESTION.
• [To THE EDITOR 07 THE " SPZCTATOR."]
Sra,—As an American who has just spent two months in Great Britain, permit me to call attention to certain facts re pro- hibition which I found so frequently overlooked both in England and Scotland. This is evidenced in the correspondence of Mr.
E. Rovvson, published in your issue of September 3rd. He sug- gests that you are incorrect when you state in the article of August 27th that " the American people accepted prohibition." Not only did they accept it, but before we had national pro- hibition thirty-six states of the forty-eight had already, through their legislatures or by popular vote, chosen prohibition for themselves. Now, when three-fourths of our states separately and individually choose a certain thing, they are naturally going to make it the law of the lard. This is the very thins which our constitution provides. So, to be sure, thirty-six "dry" states foisted prohibition on twelve "wet " states. But out of the twelve, nine of them through their legislatures ratified the eighteenth amendment, which gave us national prohibition, affording the action of nine more states than was required. This certainly is no rule of "a well organized minority." I chance to live in one of the three states which did not ratify the amendment. Our largest city is about the size of Edinburgh. Being but a few miles distant from my home, I am frequently there—usually on Saturday nights—and with all the opposition of a vast foreign population I have not seen as much drunkenness in two years as I saw in any one night visiting certain cities of Great Britain only one-third as large. Home brewing there is, to be sure, but its effects make it a negligible factor in comparison to the old system of licence. Again, it is contended by Mr. Rowson, as by so many I met. that we must not legislate for the drunkard, but for the average citizen. This latter is exactly what America is discovering she has done. You legislate for the benefit of the whole of society when you greatly diminish drunkenness. This is true indus- trially as well as socially. Not only so, but society is growing more considerate of the weak, and the socially strong are learn- ing to bear the infirmities of the socially weak. When we legis- late against thieving we legislate not only for the protection of society, but for the reclamation of the thief. In the matter of prohibition it is the sacrifice of the individual for the sake of that submerged section of society which lacks the power to control itself. Law enforcement in states which did not chop: prohibition for themselves will be a difficult problem at first, but the traffic is outlawed and the trade no longer has a stand- ing. It is only, then, a question of time until the will of thirty- six states must prevail in the entire forty-eight. One thing is ever to be remembered—that the opposition is from the " wet " states; and, unfortunately, all the news I saw in Great Britain on this matter came from a few of these, not from the great mass of the nation which represents the real will of the people.
Montclair, N.Y.
Previous page
