The Use and Need of the Life of Carrie A. Nation [59]
from that
time this man fell dead on the streets of Coney Island. This was the
first time I every had handcuffs on. I saw in this experience in Police
Courts in Coney Island what I never saw before, eight or ten women
sentenced for drunkenness; one the mother of five children, and the
others nice looking young ladies, and most of them were weeping. When
they received their sentences there would be a smothered laugh from the
audience of bloated men present, and I turned and said: "Shame on you,
for laughing at the sorrows of these poor women." I thought how heartless
it was for men to laugh at the disgrace of women. I got out by
paying for the destruction of the cigar case.
I was very successful and made enough money to pay $125 a month
to have my SMASHER'S MAIL published in the form of a magazine,
but having no one in Topeka that could edit the magazine, doing justice
to me, I returned and closed the business.
CHAPTER X.
LEGAL STATUS OF PROHIBITION AND JOINT SMASHING,
The very highest judicial authority, the Supreme Court of the Nation,
has made a most radical ruling, towit: "No legislature can bargain
away the public health or the public morals. The people themselves cannot
do it, much less their servants. Government is organized with a view
to their preservation and cannot divest itself of the power to provide
for them."--101 U. S. 816.
No state, therefore, can license or legalize immorality, vice or crime.
All such efforts are treason to society and organized government.
Again, the Supreme Court of the United States has declared: "If
the public safety or the public morals require the discontinuance of any
manufacture or traffic, the hand of the legislature cannot be stayed from
providing for its discontinuance, by any incidental inconvenience which
individuals or corporations may suffer."--97 U. S. 32. Thus the legislature
of any state can confiscate property by wholesale if necessary for
the protection of the community. Powder mills, slaughter houses and
pest houses, necessary institutions, are frequently so condemned and
rendered absolutely worthless.
The Federal Supreme Court gives ample power to all states to enforce
this great fundamental principle. It says: "The state cannot by any
contract limit the exercise of her power to the prejudice of the public
health and the public morals."--111 U. S. 751.
Speaking specifically, a sweeping decision of the highest tribunal of
the land, is as follows: "There is no inherent right in a citizen to thus
sell intoxicating liquors by retail; it is not a privilege of a citizen of a
state or a citizen of the United States."--137 U. S. 86.
No state or citizen of the United States then has any power, authority
or right to vend intoxicating liquors at all.
That there may be no misconception or misconstruction, in a case
from Kansas, this final court of appeal in American jurisprudence, said:
"For we cannot shut out of view the fact, within the knowledge of all,
that the public health, the public morals, and the public safety may be
endangered by the general use of intoxicating drinks; nor the fact,
established
by statistics accessible to everyone, that the idleness, disorder,
pauperism, and crime existing in the country are, in some degree at least,
traceable to the evil,"--Mugler vs. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623.
And again: "The statistics of every state show a greater amount
of crime and misery attributable to the use of ardent spirits obtained at
these liquor saloons than to any other source."--137 U. S. 86.
Hon. Justice Grier said: "It is not necessary to array the appalling
statistics of misery, pauperism, and crime that have their origin in the use
and abuse of ardent spirits. The police power, which is exclusively in
the state, is competent to the correction of these great evils, and all
measures
of restraint or prohibition necessary to effect that purpose are within
the scope of that authority, and if a loss of revenue should accrue to the
United States, from a diminished consumption of ardent
time this man fell dead on the streets of Coney Island. This was the
first time I every had handcuffs on. I saw in this experience in Police
Courts in Coney Island what I never saw before, eight or ten women
sentenced for drunkenness; one the mother of five children, and the
others nice looking young ladies, and most of them were weeping. When
they received their sentences there would be a smothered laugh from the
audience of bloated men present, and I turned and said: "Shame on you,
for laughing at the sorrows of these poor women." I thought how heartless
it was for men to laugh at the disgrace of women. I got out by
paying for the destruction of the cigar case.
I was very successful and made enough money to pay $125 a month
to have my SMASHER'S MAIL published in the form of a magazine,
but having no one in Topeka that could edit the magazine, doing justice
to me, I returned and closed the business.
CHAPTER X.
LEGAL STATUS OF PROHIBITION AND JOINT SMASHING,
The very highest judicial authority, the Supreme Court of the Nation,
has made a most radical ruling, towit: "No legislature can bargain
away the public health or the public morals. The people themselves cannot
do it, much less their servants. Government is organized with a view
to their preservation and cannot divest itself of the power to provide
for them."--101 U. S. 816.
No state, therefore, can license or legalize immorality, vice or crime.
All such efforts are treason to society and organized government.
Again, the Supreme Court of the United States has declared: "If
the public safety or the public morals require the discontinuance of any
manufacture or traffic, the hand of the legislature cannot be stayed from
providing for its discontinuance, by any incidental inconvenience which
individuals or corporations may suffer."--97 U. S. 32. Thus the legislature
of any state can confiscate property by wholesale if necessary for
the protection of the community. Powder mills, slaughter houses and
pest houses, necessary institutions, are frequently so condemned and
rendered absolutely worthless.
The Federal Supreme Court gives ample power to all states to enforce
this great fundamental principle. It says: "The state cannot by any
contract limit the exercise of her power to the prejudice of the public
health and the public morals."--111 U. S. 751.
Speaking specifically, a sweeping decision of the highest tribunal of
the land, is as follows: "There is no inherent right in a citizen to thus
sell intoxicating liquors by retail; it is not a privilege of a citizen of a
state or a citizen of the United States."--137 U. S. 86.
No state or citizen of the United States then has any power, authority
or right to vend intoxicating liquors at all.
That there may be no misconception or misconstruction, in a case
from Kansas, this final court of appeal in American jurisprudence, said:
"For we cannot shut out of view the fact, within the knowledge of all,
that the public health, the public morals, and the public safety may be
endangered by the general use of intoxicating drinks; nor the fact,
established
by statistics accessible to everyone, that the idleness, disorder,
pauperism, and crime existing in the country are, in some degree at least,
traceable to the evil,"--Mugler vs. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623.
And again: "The statistics of every state show a greater amount
of crime and misery attributable to the use of ardent spirits obtained at
these liquor saloons than to any other source."--137 U. S. 86.
Hon. Justice Grier said: "It is not necessary to array the appalling
statistics of misery, pauperism, and crime that have their origin in the use
and abuse of ardent spirits. The police power, which is exclusively in
the state, is competent to the correction of these great evils, and all
measures
of restraint or prohibition necessary to effect that purpose are within
the scope of that authority, and if a loss of revenue should accrue to the
United States, from a diminished consumption of ardent