PROHIBITION IN MAINE.

By the HON. NEAL DOW.

The policy of license to the liquor traffic had been the uniform practice

of the civilized world since the reign of Edward VI., of England, when

it was first established. Since that time, in England, there have been

more than four hundred and fifty separate acts relating to the traffic,

each of them being a vain attempt to improve upon all that had gone

before, in the hope, if not in the expectation, of diminishing in some

degree the tremendous evils coming from it. For the last twenty years

there has been no session of Parliament, I think, at which there have not

been several separate bills introduced, relating to that matter; at some

of them, these bills have been in number, from eight to ten, sometimes

even twelve. When our fathers first came over the waters to this western

world, they brought with them the policy of license, because at that time

no other had been attempted or thought of.

In 1820 Maine was separated from Massachusetts and set up housekeeping

for herself, bringing with her, as a part of her outfit, the policy of

license, which had been brought over in the “Mayflower” by the Pilgrim

Fathers, and established in Plymouth colony in the first years of its

existence. By the peculiar industries of Maine the people were led into

the habit of the excessive use of strong drink. All our people living

a little way back from the sea coast were engaged in the lumbering

business. We had vast forests of invaluable pine, whence Maine was and

is called the “Pine Tree State.” The people through all the winter

season were living in camps in the woods, engaged in felling the trees

and transporting them to the water courses, by which they would be taken

to the innumerable saw mills which crowded the falls on almost all our

streams. In the camps, away from home influences and home restraints,

the “lumbermen” indulged freely in strong drink, which was a large and

indispensable part of their rations.

On the breaking up of the streams in the spring, these men were engaged

in “driving river,” as it was called, i. e., following the “drives” of

logs, many, many miles down all the water courses to the “booms,” whence

they were impounded and secured ready for the saw mills which were kept

in operation through the year, often running night and day. On these

drives many of the men were often in the icy water more or less all day,

dislodging the logs from rocks or shallows, by which they were stopped

in their course down stream. In all this laborious and trying work, the

men used rum freely and largely, as the universal custom was in those

days. In those old times I have seen our great rivers covered for miles,

from shore to shore, with innumerable logs, so closely packed as almost

to hide the water from view. Many “river drivers” were following along

on either shore to prevent the logs from “lodging,” and to “start” all

that had been “grounded.” At night I have seen these men in great numbers

around their camp fires, wild and boisterous, under the influence of

liquor, like so many Comanche savages just home from the war path, with

many scalps hanging at their belts. On many of these drives the men

would be engaged for weeks, with rum as the most important part of their

ration. On the return of these men to civilized life a large part of them

would spend in a week, in a drunken carouse, all the wages paid them for

their winter’s work, without regard to wife and children at home.

The saw mills in Maine were on a very large scale, and were in great

numbers. There were great masses of men engaged in them, all using rum

freely and in immense quantities. I have heard it said that two quarts

a day to each man was the regular allowance. While all these men—in

whatever department working—earned large wages, they were not at all

benefited by that, because they spent all in rum, except a miserable

pittance doled out to the wretched wife and children.

The transportation of this “lumber” to the West Indies—the principal

market for it—was a very great industry; it was called the “West India

Trade.” Great numbers of vessels were engaged in it, running from all

our principal ports which had direct communication with the vast system

of saw mills on all our streams. The returns for this lumber were mostly

West India rum and molasses, to be converted into New England rum, at

our numerous distilleries. All along our sea coast great numbers of our

people were engaged in the mackerel and cod fisheries; there were a

great many vessels employed in that industry, the products of which were

mostly sent to the West Indies in the lumber ships, the returns for which

were also “rum and molasses!” I have heard men say who were owners of

timber lands and of saw mills—“operators” on a large scale, and owners

of West India traders—that Maine was never a dollar the richer for all

these great industries. The returns were mostly in rum, and in molasses

converted into rum, so that our boundless forests of invaluable timber

were literally poured down the throats of our people in the form of rum.

The result of all this was that Maine was the poorest state in the Union,

consuming the entire value of all its property of every kind in rum, in

every period of less than twenty years.

I have run hastily over this account of the condition of Maine in the old

rum time to show that our people, according to the general opinion on

this subject, were most unlikely to adopt a policy of prohibition to the

liquor traffic, which was spread everywhere all over the state, and was

intimately interwoven into all the habits and customs of the time. All

over the state there was a general appearance of neglect and dilapidation

in houses, barns, school houses, farms, churches. By their habits of

drinking a great many of our people were disinclined to work, and many

of them were unfitted for it. It used to be said that three-fourths of

the farms were mortgaged to the town, village and country traders, all of

whom kept in stock liquors of all sorts as the most important and most

profitable part of their supplies.

A few men in Maine resolved to change all that by changing the law by

which the liquor traffic was licensed, and by substituting for it the

policy of prohibition. This was supposed to be a great undertaking,

as in fact it was. An indispensable preparatory step was to change

public opinion, on which all law is supposed to be founded. To do this

meetings were held all over the state—not only in the larger towns,

but in villages and in all the rural districts. There was hardly a

little country church or town house or roadside school house where we

did not lay out before the people the fact that the liquor traffic was

inconsistent with the general good; that it was in deadly hostility to

every interest of nation, state and people. In our missionary work about

the state, traveling in our own carriages in summer, and in our own

sleighs in winter, we took with us large supplies of tracts relating to

the liquor traffic and its results. These were prepared for the purpose,

and were distributed freely at all our meetings, and we threw them out to

the people as we passed their houses, and as we met them on our way; and

to the children as we passed the country school houses. In this way, by

persistent work, we changed the public opinion upon the matter and fired

the hearts of the people with a burning indignation against the liquor

traffic, by which they were made poor and kept poor.

This work was continued for several years without intermission; we had a

definite object in view, and that was to overthrow the liquor traffic, to

outlaw it, to put it under the ban, and to drive it out as a pestilent

thing, the whole influence of which was to spread poverty, pauperism,

suffering, wretchedness and crime broadcast among the people, at the same

time that no possible good came from it. In due time we made earnest

application to the legislature for a law of prohibition, but our prayers

were not heeded. We were regarded as having no rights which politicians

were bound to respect, and we were treated with small courtesy. We soon

took in the situation, and addressed ourselves at once to the only

instrumentality through which we could possibly succeed—that is, the

ballot box. We sent in great numbers of petitions to the legislature, but

we were beaten by more than two to one. At the next election we swept the

State House clear of almost every man who had voted against us; we did

this irrespective of all party ties and affiliations.

To the legislature thus elected we sent no petitions; we went there in

person, with a bill all prepared, and offered it as one that would be

acceptable to temperance men. It was on Friday, the 30th of May, 1851,

that we did this. We had a public hearing in the Representative Hall on

the afternoon of that day. Saturday, the 31st of May, was to be the last

day of the session. The committee voted unanimously to accept the bill as

it was, with no change whatever. It was printed on Friday night and laid

upon the desks of the members the next morning. Immediately after the

morning hour it was taken up for consideration.

Now this was the situation on that Saturday morning. The liquor traffic

was a lawful trade in Maine, as it was throughout the civilized world.

There were liquor shops, wholesale and retail, all over the state, with

large stocks of liquor for sale, as there are now in all our states,

where the traffic is yet prosecuted by authority of law, and under its

protection. The bill lying upon the members’ desks proposed to change

all that; it forbade the trade absolutely; it declared that there was

no property in intoxicating liquors kept for unlawful sale; that such

liquors so kept, or supposed to be so kept, should be seized on complaint

and warrant, or on sight, without warrant, and should be confiscated and

destroyed, unless the claimant could show to the satisfaction of the

court that they were not intended for sale. They might be seized wherever

seen; on railway cars, on steamboats, or in transitu by any other mode

of transportation; they might be hunted like wild and dangerous beasts,

and like them, if resistance was offered, they might be destroyed upon

the spot. If it be decided that the liquors are kept for unlawful sale,

the party is sentenced, in addition to the loss of the liquor, to a fine

of one hundred dollars and costs, and on the second conviction, to the

same fine and to imprisonment at hard labor for six months. And it was

expressly provided that no action should be had or maintained in any

court in the state for the recovery of intoxicating liquors nor for the

value thereof. The liquor traffic was put by that bill outside the law,

beyond its protection, and was denounced as an enemy to the state and

people—utterly inconsistent with the public welfare.

On that Saturday this extraordinary measure, such as had never been heard

of in the world before, with no change whatever, was passed through all

its stages to be enacted, and on Monday, at nine o’clock in the morning,

it was approved by the Governor, and from that moment it was the law,

because the act provided that it should take effect when signed by the

executive. All the stocks of liquors in the state were then liable to

be seized and destroyed, but the local authorities allowed the parties

having them in possession a reasonable time in which to “send them away

to other states and countries where they could be lawfully sold;” and

this was done. There was a hasty departure of these liquors from all

parts of the state. It was not an appeal to the legislature by petitions

that accomplished this wonderful overturn in the status of the liquor

traffic in Maine, it was simply and only because the people put their

will in relation to it into the ballot box. There is no other way in

which it can be done in any other states, or in the nation. This movement

against the liquor traffic is now, as it was then, a far more important

political question than any other, more important than all others

combined, to every interest of the nation, state, and people. What has

been the result of this legislation?

“In some places liquor is sold secretly in violation of law, as many

other offences are committed against the statutes, but in large

districts of the state, the liquor traffic is nearly or quite unknown,

where formerly it was carried on like any other trade.

“SIDNEY PERHAM,

“Governor of Maine.”

“I can and do, from my own personal observation, unhesitatingly affirm

that the consumption of intoxicating liquors in Maine is not to-day

one-fourth so great as it was twenty years ago; in the country portions

of the state the sale and use have almost entirely ceased. In my opinion

our remarkable temperance reform of to-day is the legitimate child of the

law.

“WM. P. FRYE,

“M. C. of Maine, and ex-Att’y Gen’l of the State.”

“I have the honor unhesitatingly to concur in the opinions expressed in

the foregoing by my colleague, Hon. Wm. Frye.

“LOT M. MORRILL,

“U. S. Senate.”

“I concur in the foregoing statements; and on the point of the relative

amount of liquors sold at present in Maine and in those states where a

system of license prevails, I am very sure from personal knowledge and

observation that the sales are immeasurably less in Maine.

“J. G. BLAINE,

“Speaker U. S. House of Representatives.”

“I concur in the statements made by Mr. Frye. Of the great good produced

by the Prohibitory Liquor Law of Maine, no man can doubt who has seen its

result. It has been of immense value.

“H. HAMLIN,

“U. S. Senate.”

“We are satisfied that there is much less intemperance in Maine than

formerly, and that the result is largely produced by what is termed

prohibitory legislation.

“JOHN A. PETERS, M. C of Maine.

“EUGENE HALE, M. C. of Maine.”

“I fully concur in the statement of my colleague, Mr. Frye, in regard to

the effect of the enforcement of the liquor law in the state of Maine.

“JOHN LYNCH, M. C. of Maine.”

These certificates are from both Senators and all the Representatives of

Maine in Congress.

These statements are indorsed by many mayors and ex-mayors of cities, and

many other officials in every part of the state; by General Chamberlaine,

ex-Governor and President of Bowdoin College, and by many clergymen in

every county in the state.

The convention of Good Templars resolved, “That by the operation of

the Maine law in this state, the traffic in intoxicating liquors has

been greatly diminished, and that the happy effects of this change are

everywhere apparent, and that the quantity of liquors now sold in this

state can not be one-tenth as much as it was formerly.”

The State Conventions of the Republican party of Maine have always

adopted resolves relating to this matter. I have some of them before me

now.

Republican State Convention of 1878: “Temperance among the people may

be greatly promoted by wise prohibitory legislation, as well as by all

those moral agencies which have secured us beneficent results; and it

is a source of congratulation that the principle of prohibition, which

has always been upheld by Republicans, is now concurred in by so large

a majority of the people that it is no longer a party question, the

Democrats having for several years declined to contest and dispute

it.” 1879: “We recognize temperance as a cause which has conferred

the greatest benefits on the state, and we sustain the principle of

prohibition which in its operation has so largely suppressed liquor

selling, and added incalculably to the sum of virtue and prosperity among

the people.” 1880: “Experience has demonstrated the wisdom of the policy

of prohibition as an auxiliary of temperance, and as contributing to the

material wealth, happiness and prosperity of the state; and we refer with

confidence and pride to an undeviating support of the same as one of the

cardinal principles of the Republican party of Maine.”

There was no election in 1881, and no convention, but the resolve of 1882

is:

“We refer with confidence and pride to the general result of

the Republican party in support of the policy of prohibiting

the traffic in intoxicating liquors, the wisdom and efficiency

of which legislation in promoting the moral and material

interests of Maine have been demonstrated through the practical

annihilation of that traffic in a large portion of the state;

and we favor such legislation and such enforcement of law as

will secure to every portion of our territory freedom from that

traffic. We further recommend the submission to the people of a

prohibitory Constitutional amendment.”

Such is the latest authoritative and comprehensive testimony to the

actual results of prohibition in Maine. Similar testimonies could easily

be obtained from the most influential sources in every part of the state.

Every brewery and distillery has been suppressed. Molasses, which is yet

imported into the state in large quantities, is no longer converted into

rum, but is used exclusively for domestic purposes, while a large part of

it is converted into sugar by improved processes. The share of Maine of

the national drink bill would be about $13,000,000, but I am far within

the truth in saying that one million will cover the cost of all liquors

smuggled into the state in violation of law. From the poorest state in

the Union, Maine has become one of the most prosperous, and it has gained

immeasurably in many other ways from the policy of prohibition.

The Chautauquan, Vol. 04, April 1884, No. 7 · 第 53 / 113 题