The Seattle Star Newspaper, October 20, 1914, Page 6

PPOVERTY Adopts Resolution Full of Con- vincing Arguments Against Prohibition. 2 In view of the fact that labor organizations in California | took the lead in resolving against State-wide Prohibition, it ‘will be of interest to the Federation of Labor in Washington to be able to read the reasons why similar organizations in oppose State-wide Prohibition. Hence the follow- is reproduced: n HE Committee of Mutual Conference of the Celtic Union BAR and German-American League, representing the allied rman-American and Irish-American societies of San Fran 9 and the state, and empowered to act for them, adopted their meeting Thursday a resolution opposing the pro- d state-wide prohibition. The resolution, which is full convincing arguments against the proposed prohibition jendment, is as follows Whereas, There will be submitted to the voters of Cali ja at the November, 1914, election, an amendment to the itution of this state to prohibit the manufacure, sale,) it Or transportation within the state of intoxicating liquors, d prohibiting the transportation thereof into the state un : his shown to be for medical, scientific, mechanical or cramental purposes; and, | Whereas, California has 320,000 acres devoted to viti- ; The wine industry represents an investment of 000, yielding annually $30,000,000; supports 75,000) ons. The California breweries represent an investment $50,000,000, distribute $6,000,000 to 4,000 employes, con-| $1,000,000 worth of California barley, $175,000 worth California hops, and 00,000 worth of other essentials. | y the general government an annual revenue of 0,400, and about the same amount to towns and cities the manufacture and distribution of liquors 282,000 per are employed and dependent. In the distribution of rs $10,000,000 is invested, and the annual license tax paid $3,000,000 ; and, Whereas, The adoption of the foregoing amendment would only destroy great properties and industries, impoverish| ousands of families and increase the army of unemployed, fut it would substitute the vilest of poisonous concoctions for pure wines, beers and brandies, and make every taxpayer the cost of this industrial cataclysm; and, Whereas, The industrial, agricultural and commercial de- opment of California should in every manner be encouraged assisted instead of being retarded and destroyed by the ption of this prohibitory measure; and, Whereas, The foregoing considerations should of them- es wield a tremendous influence over ourselves in deter-| ining the attitude that we should assume toward the pro- d constitutional amendment, there are other considerations @ personal and political nature which should wield even a powerful influence over us, in determining what this atti-| de should be. We are opposed to the doctrine that it is the right of part} the people to compel the other part to do in all things what | first part thinks the latter ought to do, for its own benefit "We believe that such doctrine is an invasion of the right of 3 idual freedom. We believe that individual freedom is the merstone of American liberty. That the doctrine of indi- ual freedom is expressed in the words—that it is the right the citizen to act and live as he thinks best, so long as his )eonduct does not invade a like right on the part of others. It | is the doctrine which enthrones individual conscience and indi- " vidual responsibility. | There is not lacking eminent authority, both medical and ‘Otherwise, that the use of, or the moderate or intelligent indul- gence of such beverages is beneficial, whereas, the abuse of, » or the excessive or unreasonable indulgence of the same, is det- "fimental. Is this not true of everything? Is it not true of ‘fire and water, the greatest of human agencies? ; Yet such a movement would not be different in principle = from that involved in the proposed constitutional amendment tinder consideration. Where is the line to be drawn? If the | government represented by the majority has the right to con- i QUOR AND IVORCE CALIFORNIA By Hortense Russell Intemperance has the lowest average in divorce causes, in California, with the exception of according to statistics compiled by the State Labor Bureau. Of all the divorces granted in the State of Califor- nia from 1905 to 1913, less than 4 per cent were obtained on the grounds of intemperance. felony, Drunkenness second lowest in the for divorce. This condition does not vary in four years’ compilation of tistics, comes six causes Final decrees granted in the year ending June 30, 1908, show that intemperance is only in a small degree responsible for di- vorce. The total of divorces granted during that year numbered 2,782. Out of that number 112 divorces, a fraction number over 4 per cent, were granted on the grounds of intemperance. In 1909 this percentage fell to 31% per cent; in 1911 to 3 per cent; in 1912 the average was still 3144 per cent. Anti-Saloon League Head “Says Something” “Tam by nature and education a teetotaler, and have been an ardent and sincere advocate of prohibition. I have reached the place, however, where I will no longer allow my desires to bias my judgment as to the best method of dealing with so impor- tant a matter as the drink ques- tion. Methods of work must be adapted to meet the present con- ditions. To attempt to force a law of any character upon the people against their protest will fail in its purpose. Laws cannot be successfully enforced without a sustaining public sentiment."— Rey. Dr. W. C. Holt, Evansville, Indiana, ex-Superintendent Anti- Saloon League. il the individual in the matter of his drink it has the equal |* Fight to control him in the matter of his diet, his dress, his Speech, his labors, his recreation and his therapeutics. The ght of reasonable regulation is not denied or challenged, but the right of compulsion in these matters is. The question in- © volved in the constitutional amendment under consideration is | Mot the right to regulate or abolish the saloon, but the right § to say what the individual shall drink in his own home, with Or without his meals. We do not approve of folly or excess of any kind, but we believe that the correction of all such dis-| orders should rest in the good sense of the people themselves. | 3 himself from within and not from the outside. that we have been endowed with this right of free choice. | | That it is our birthright. That the surrender of this right is | self-imposed slavery or subjection to the domination of others. occupations of many so-called Americans look to yourselves, and let us do likewise, for thus alone are we equal before the law. Therefore be it resolved by the Committee of Mutual Con ference of the Celtic Union and German-American League that | we are opposed to the adoption of the proposed prohibition perance and an infringement of personal liberty Resolved further, That this resolution be given the widest g ible circulation among the membership of the constituent ies hereto. 4 Dated September 3, 1914 | COMMITTEE OF MUTUAL CONFERENCE OF CELTIC UNION AND GERMAN-AMERICAN LEAGUE GEORGE H. BAHRS, President. T. P. O'DOWD, Secretary J Vice-President ( Treasurer GEORGE J. LOW W. D. WOLPMANN THOS. F. ALFORD OHN J. MUNSTER. . J. DRISCOLL, STAR—TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1914. PAGE 6. NOT LIQUOR) MAR-AMIRICAN LEAGUE PROTEST AGAINST “DRY” AMEND RBIDDEN FRUITS TEMPT By DR. MARTIN REGENSBURGER, President of California State Board of Health IF the people of this country were educated to drink wine, alcoholism would be a rare disease, as has been proven in wine-drinking coun- tries. It is the forbidden fruits that tempt. In my experience, in families where the wine flows freely, drunkards are the exception, whereas many of the offspring of teetotalers and wine abhorrers, who have not tasted alcoholics until they have almost grown to be men, become drunkards. Alcohol, in the shape of beers and wines, is not a poison. stimulant, and the human system needs stimulation. If you bring up children with beer and wine on the table, as is done in some of the European countries, you will have no drunkards. It is a MRS. PHOEBE A. HEARST AGAINST PROHIBITION HE following communication was published in a recent issue of The California Grape Grower: Mr. G. E. Lawrence, Room 501, 12 Geary Street, San Fran- cisco—My Dear Sir: 1 regret the delay in feplying to your letter of July 17th. I am not and never have been in favor of prohibition. The W. C. T. U. people have asked me at different times (not recently) to help them, and I have always declined—not that I am not in favor of temperance, but because I did not think their methods were always wise, or likely to to achieve the end in view. I am opposed to intemperance, but not to a moderate use of wine, and I am convinced that the countries where wine is freely used are not those where the highest rate of intemperance pre- vails. In this wine-producing state, especially, I think it would be a mis- take and do much more harm than good to establish prohibition. Yours very truly, iy PHOEBE A. HEARST. Hacienda Del Pozo de Verona, July 27, 1914. WHERE IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT Here is a table showing the ratios of arrests for drunkenness and dis- turbing the peace in one year in a few prohibition citles: No, of Arrests Per 10,000 Population - Drunk Disturbing enness. Peace. 1,970.0 705.5 2,806.9 163.8 1,185.9 775.7 4,381.2 478.9 CITIES. Kansas City, Kan......... Portland, Me. .........- Topeka, Kan. Wichita, Kan. ...... sied taeeeeen Estimated Fe Population. 31,110, LIQUOR AND CRIME By CLARENCE DARROW j Clarence Darrow is one of the leading criminal lawyers of the country. His profession has always brought © That regulation and control should come to everyone from him in contact with the criminal classes. Therefore, what Mr. Darrow says about crime and the use of liquor We believe| should have great weight: 6¢JQROM more than thirty-five years’ experience in court, | am satisfied that Intox- | E Trying to make men over by compulsion is one of the favorite|icating liquors have practically nothing to do with We say to such,|what the world calls real crime. “One needs but recall wefl-known murder cases | within their own observation and reading to show | Not only has liquor next to nothing to do with crime, but the orfgin and | amendment as an unfair measure contrary to sound political|Cause of so-called criminal actions have In the main | principles and a direct interference with the cause of true tem-|been clearly ascertained and are well understood by the absurdity of any such claim. thoughtful men. “Take, for instance, murder. Many more homi- constant | intoxicated beyond his control. “Passing from murder, the majority of crimes of violence are committed for the first time by boys in adolescent age and generally from surroundings of poverty where no opportunity for life and activity can come. Boys from fourteen to twenty-one should be carefully trained, not punished, no matter what act they may do. Under proper environment boys so trained, if they live to maturer years, will develop steady characters and staple lives. “But the great cause of crime is poverty. Most figure as a defense that the act was done by one| cides result from the affections and passions between men and women than from any other cause, and yet their feelings are responsible for life and for the best that the world gives. The catastrophes result because the feelings are so vital and so primitive. Homicides, too, come through the great social and political agita- tions incident to life. Out of some twenty-odd Presi- dents of the United States, three have been shot. Liquor had nothing to do with any of them. The cause lay in the strong feelings and agitation of the times. Many are murdered for money; many through hatred; many while other acts are being committed. Very seldom is there a case where even a lawyer can crimes are property crimes, or it might be said crimes against property, yet they have all been committed by the poor. The people who have the wealth of the world have committed no crimes against property; but all the crimes against property have been com- mitted by the penniless. “To say that liquor causes any considerable amount of poverty is equally absurd. Monopoly is the father and mother of poverty and ever will be. The poor do not drink all the liquor. They make it all, but the best of it is drunk by the rich. If drinking liquor causes crime and poverty, why is it that the rich do not go to jail as well as the poor?” — —— POVERTY IS THE MAIN CAUSE OF INTEMPERANCE _ DECLARES MARY E. GARBUTT The writer of this article was a garment worker and came constantly in contact with the working classes—and this is what she said: 1667 HAVE been a member of the Woman’s Christian Tem- perance Union for twenty-five years. The line of argu- ment many temperance workers make today as to the cause jot poverty I used to make myself. They say that if the work- ingman would keep away from the saloon and quit drinking, he and his family would have the necessaries of life, if not its comforts. They cite specific cases and then draw theitye general conclusions from a few isolated facts. “*There’s Mr. Smith's family,’ says a W. C. T. U. mhem- ‘in destitute circumstances. Mr drunk the greater part of the time, so that he cannot keep a job when he gets one.’ ‘And there’s Mr. Brown, my next door neigh- bor,’ exclaims another white ribboner; ‘his wife and children objects of charity because he spends his time and money in the saloon.’ ber, Smith is “IT heard one of our prominent State temperance workers say but a short time ago, speaking of the army of children working in the cotton mills of the South, that if their fathers | would keep sober and go to work child labor would cease. “Now, what are the real facts in the case? Is intemper- jance the immediate cause of poverty, or, on the other hand, does poverty largely act as a cause in producing intemper- ance? And today, under the present industrial system, are not a large proportion of the workers poor, even though total jabstainers? “Two things are absolutely essential for a® workingman jto have the necessaries of life. First, work to do, and, second, jlarge enough wages to meet the needs of himself and family. | If he is employed only a part of the time and his wages are |low, poverty must as a matter of fact follow, whether he |drinks or not. | “In the year 1903 Carroll D. Wright gave the percentage of those unemployed during some portion of the year as 49.8 per cent (See Eighteenth Annual Labor Report, page 42). The census of 1900 placed it in round numbers at 6,468,964, or 228 per cent of the total. Commissioner Wright enumer- Jates some of the causes of idleness as follows: + 56.96 pet. 23.65 pet. 2.67 pet. +. 1.66 pet. oo ae pet, | Establishments closed Sickness Strikes ... “From this report simply a fraction of 1 per cent of the jidleness among workingmen is caused by intemperance, com- | paratively a small proportion arises from strikes, but the shut- | ting down of mills, factories, mines and other industries causes |over one-half of the idleness, while the large per cent of sick- |ness as a cause is largely attributed to a disregard, to a crim- |inal extent, of the employers of labor for the health of their employes. | “Less than 3 per cent of the appalling total idleness which | exists in this country can be charged to the working class. | “Now let us glance briefly at the wages paid and see if |they are commensurate with the needs of the working class. “At least one-fourth of the working class employed get no |more than $10 per week for their labor. Periods of unemploy- |ment, which occur to most of them, cut this amount down in |the course of the year. In the majority of cases 20 to 25 per cent of these wages must go for rent, leaving from $6 to $7 a week for the living expenses of a family of three or four or more. Does it look as if these poorly paid workers, if they were only thrifty and frugal and left drink alone, would keep the wolf from the door? “If the saloons were all closed and the people were all total abstainers, the pall of poverty would still hang over the home of the workingman, because of his enforced idleness at times and the poor wages paid for his labor, “It is a fact that all careful students of social conditions today recognize that intemperance, as it exists among+the poor, jis more truly the result of poverty than the cause, Prof. Rich- | ily says: ‘We should never forget the temptations to Jintemperance which lie in the character of the toil of many laborers. Many hours are regarded by competent authorities jas a cause which predisposes to the use of intoxicants. The | strain of work by the side of rapidly moving machinery on the nervous system is another predisposing cause of intemperance which has attracted serious attention.’ Willard said: jard G. “Frances E “Under the searchlight of |knowledge in these later days it is folly for us longer to ignore the mighty power of poverty to induce evil habits of every kind. It was only our ignorance of the condition of the industrial classes that magnified a single propaganda and min- imized every other, so that the temperance people, in earlier days, believed that if men and women were temperate all other material good would follow in the train of that great grace.’ | “IT call upon the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and other temperance organizations to get down to the bed- rock cause of the drink habit! It is folly to work with effects; yea, it is criminal, in the light of the knowledge we have.” j (Paid Advertising—Wage Earners’ League of Washingtoa), )