Northern Tribune

have had a prohibitory law in operation for years, it must be conceded that even there, under the most favorable circumstances the law has not accomplished what was expected, or what was claimed for it by its earnest advocates. In fact there, as in other states where it has been tried, it virtually means free whiskey. One of our leading Democratic citizens, a man who is as well posted as any in the state, perhaps, upon the feelings of the saloon men upon this question, says that half, at least, of those interested in the liquor business in the state will vote for the amendment should it be submitted to the popular vote, and the reason he gives for their support is that they believe it would virtually abolish all restrictions on their business and that they would be allowed to carry on an untrammelled trade in liquors.

Another of our leading Democratic citizens says that if the amendment should be adopted he would have a supply of liquors in his place of business, for the accommodation of his customers, just as soon as he could secure it. The fact is those who favor the traffic in liquors judge from the results in those states having prohibitory laws, and hence favor the adoption of the amendment as being in favor of the free traffic in liquors. The prediction is made that should the amendment be adopted that the number of places where liquor would be sold would be largely increased, as every person desiring to enter the business could do so with little or no capital, while under the present law the heavy tax prohibits those of limited means from procuring a license and engaging in the business.