WHY MAINE HAS REVOLTED?

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1253, 9 October 1911, Page 6

WHY MAINE HAS REVOLTED?

« THE OVERTHROW OF PROHIBITION, Apropos of the cablegram appearing in another part of this issue it might be observed that religious and public opinion in the State of Maino has for many years been gradually veering to the conviction that prohibition is aliko fallacious anil futile. At first people fondly imagined that prohibition would bring in the millennium,'and the clergy of Maine lieHeved that no-license and prohibition would bo an aid to church-going and develop loftier religious ideals; they accordingly invoked' "the beggarly elements oj .the law," and after many years discovered their mistake. That Methodist preacher, the Rev. C. S. Cumming, declared, as far back as 1900, that there were seventy towns in Maino in which no religious servico was held. The Rev. A. E. Dunning, D.D., writing to the "Andover Reviow" more, recently, stated that thero wore ninety-five towns where no religious service of any kind was held. Tho Roy. A. H. Wright,' pastor of, St. Lawrence Street Congregational Church, Portland, in a recent sermon, eaid:—"The cmdilion of things hero is simply amazing to all honost, unprejudiced, and right-minded citizens. Liquor-selling is a crime in this Stato in the eyes of the civil law; liquorsellers arc criminals. Yet hero in our Christian city, governed by Christiau men, we are told that no fewer than 300 places aro open and in full operation for tho salo of intoxicants." Is it any wonder then that "all honest, unprejudiced, and right-minded citizens" of Maino should revolt against a condition of affairs that sanctions the continuance of 300 sly grogshops in a city of 10,000 people? And, remember, for years past tho sly grogvendor has voted with the fanatical prohibitionist against the repeal of tho prohibitory law! Thus it appears that no-license and prohibition have destroyed in Maino all reverence for religion, nil respect for civil law, and thrown the prohibitionist and tho sly grog-seller into the same camp.. Is it not matter for congratulation that at last a majority of citizens of Maine have revolted against this continued outrage upon common decency? Yet some good, well-intentioned, but' misguided people in Now Zealand would have us believe, notwithstanding the unimpeachable testimony of tho veracious witnesses quoted, and the fact that Maino has now virtually. declared for licensing, that nn-licensc and prohibition -local and national-would in New Zealand constitute our highest good. It is all a delusion. Maine, after fifty years of iniquity and back-sliding under no-liccu<<\ has repented; and, like the prodigal, Maine may now be said to have como to herself—turned over a new leaf. T!ie experience of Maino under no-licenso and prohibition ought to bo a warning to all no-license and prohibition advocates in this Dominion. Surely wo aro better as wo are with one well-regulated, properly, kept hotel under license than with three despicable sly grog-shops under piohi-tion-the churches empty, and 'rightminded clergymen" deploring, like tho clorffv of Maine, the moral and religious degeneracy of tho community under no-license. That is why Maine has revolted acainst n system that was degradin" to tho people and demoralising tho whole of their social, political, and religious relationship. And the experience of Maino is one to bo avoided by the people of New Zealand.*