CORRESP ONDENCE. 



697 



of them guard their sales rigidly. The 446 

 also include the large manufacturing and 

 wholesale druggists, dealing in alcohol and 

 spirits in large amounts in their trade, yet 

 who are so far from being keepers of " dram- 

 shops," that not only do they not sell spirits 

 to be drunk ou the spot, but no one not in 

 the trade, high or low, can obtain alcohol 

 or liquor from them in any quantity, large 

 or small, for individual use, or even for 

 cooking or other family purposes. The 446 

 include the hotels, some of which have no 

 bars, and are careful how thoy sell to any 

 bat their guests. It is to be remembered 

 also that the man who opened a saloon, 

 sold whisky on the sly, and was visited by 

 the United States revenue officer and com- 

 pelled to take out a license, was included 

 among the 446, although his alcoholic stock 

 in trade may have been seized next day by 

 the sheriff, and himself sent to the house 

 of correction. These deductions would re- 

 duce the number of "dram-shops," properly 

 so called, to a smaller number in proportion 

 to population than in any other civilized 

 community of equal numbers, with the pos- 

 sible exception of the State of Maine. 



Bat if all concerns paying the United 

 States tax were to be called dram-shops, 

 then it is to be noted that the number is 

 much smaller in Vermont in proportion to 

 population than in any State which licenses 

 the sale of liquors. Thus in Massachusetts, 

 which has a " rigid license law," 8,476 per- 

 sons held United States licenses to sell liquor 

 last year, being one to every 202 of the popu- 

 lation. In Connecticut 3,357 persons paid 

 the United States tax, being one to every 

 187 of the population. In Vermont it ap- 

 pears that 446 paid the United States tax, 

 being one to 744 ! In other words, more 

 than three times as many persons were sell- 

 ing liquor in Massachusetts, and four times 

 as many in Connecticut, in proportion to 

 population, as in Vermont ! And, could the 

 amount of liquors sold where the dealer is 

 free to advertise his business and sell all 

 he can be compared with the amount sold 

 where the traffic is under the ban of a pro- 

 hibitory law, it would doubtless be found 

 that each United States license in Massa- 

 chusetts, Connecticut, New York, or any 

 other non - prohibitory State, represents a 

 vastly greater sale of liquors than in Ver- 

 mont. 



It is to be noted, further, that the num- 

 ber of persons paying the United States tax 

 in Vermont shows a noticeable decrease in 

 the last ten years, the number returned for 

 the year 1873 being 684. Here appears to be 

 a decrease of some thirty-five per cent in ten 

 years. During the same period the number 

 of United States licenses issued in Maine in- 

 creased by 73 ; in Massachusetts, by 208 ; in 

 Connecticut, by 573; in Rhode Island, by 436. 

 Something, evidently, is checking the liquor- 



traffic in Vermont to a considerable extent, 

 and the universal and strong opposition to 

 the law, on the part of those who consider 

 it to be for their interest to have more 

 rather than less intoxicating drinks con- 

 sumed, shows clearly that they attribute a 

 good part of the restriction to the prohibi- 

 tory law. 



The number of places where liquor is 

 sold in Burlington is overstated. The num- 

 ber in April, 1 883, was not threescore, but 49. 



It is not the fact that in every village 

 there is at least one such place. Many Ver- 

 mont villages have no such place, and have 

 not had for twenty years. In more than 

 half of the towns of Vermont, the United 

 States revenue collectors could not find, in 

 the year ending April 12, 1883, any one 

 selling liquor. There are 240 towns in Ver- 

 mont, and in 127 of these no drug-store, 

 hotel, or dram-shop was found that could be 

 required to pay the United States tax. The 

 statement that there is no concealment or 

 attempted concealment of such illegal traffic 

 as is conducted in the State could hardly be 

 made wider of the truth. As a general 

 thing, the traffic is everywhere concealed 

 from public view. No placard, sign, adver- 

 tisement, or open bar attracts men to drink. 

 The liquors kept for sale are kept under 

 lock and key, or in dark rooms or cellars; 

 and even then seizures are frequent and 

 fines numerous, and often ruinous to the 

 business, and prosecutions are by no means 

 confined to first offenses, or to liquor-dealers 

 of the lowest class. The law is one which 

 enables the citizens of any town to do 

 what they choose as regards illegal traffic in 

 liquor. If they choose, they can banish it. 

 If they do not care to banish it, they can 

 restrict it, if they will, to almost any extent. 

 In point of fact, in Vermont, as a whole, 

 the law exercises a steady and increasing 

 pressure upon the illegal traffic, and makes 

 it a very risky and disreputable business. 

 To this extent the law is no failure. 



Prohibition has been for over thirty 

 years the settled policy of Vermont. The 

 law has been changed by successive Legis- 

 latures only to perfect and strengthen it. 

 As the State is admitted to be " a moral and 

 God-fearing community," and its people are 

 not considered specially lacking in intelli- 

 gence, the fair inference from such extraor- 

 dinary support and popularity would seem 

 to be that the prohibitory system must have 

 merits for a community like that of Ver- 

 mont, and that it must have measurably an- 

 swered its purpose. It is idle to say that 

 this support and popularity are factitious. 

 Bubbles do not last for generations. It 

 might be possible, with effort enough, to 

 manufacture a sudden sentiment for such a 

 system, that might last for a year or two. 

 But it is safe to say that a measure hke 

 this, which stands firm year after year, and 



