OCR Text |
Show SNOOPING AT THE DINNER TABLE H It was not only because of the vast financial H and agricultural interests involved in California H that the voters of that state defeated prohibi- H tion by a 200,000 majority, says the St. Louis Post- H Dispatch. The prohibition fanatics who attempt- H ed to force their sumptuary views upon all the H people of the state actually had the impudence to H incorporate in the proposed law a clause provitl- H ing that a second conviction for serving wine at H meals in one's own homo should be punishable by H imprisonment. Is it any wonder those "drys" H failed so ignominlously? H But the incident of the attempted lnterfer- H ence with homo customs is characteristic of fa- H natical prohibitionists wherever they are to be H tound. Temperance has no meaning for them. H They would set a man's domestic aids and the H members of his own household spying at his din- H ner table, or even in his bedroom, to obtain evl- J dence on which to base an accusation of crime H where no crime was. The principle, if allowed, H would banish personal liberty in America. It H could and would be applied in medicine, in edu- H cation, in religion and in all the relationships of H daily life. H |