1878.] OF THE SENATE. 251

In Boston, Massachusetts, during the existence of the Pro-
hibitory Law, 2,700 secret drinking places were reported,
and when the law was repealed and licenses granted 2,400
only were taken out, showing that with a free liquor law less

drinking was done than during the prevalence of stringent
measures, while fewer drunken men were to be seen on their
streets.

We are informed that in Local Option Districts in this
State, there are more Government licenses taken out by
dealers than before the passage of their Local Laws, to en-
able them to sell liquors without interference from the United
States Government.

Only last week our neighboring State of Pennsylvania saw
the fallacy and injustice of the passage of the prohibition bill

and promptly voted it down.

A few words as regards the other bills before your Honor-
able Body, and we submit the whole matter to your good
judgment and impartial consideration, feeling assured that
with the facts presented, you cannot fail to see the evil effects
of the passage of this Prohibitory Law and other measures
affecting the liquor traders' interest in the State. Ours is
not a State like Virginia, well nigh crushed by a large State
debt, and which has been on the threshold of repudiation,
compelling a resort to the bell punch to save her honor. We
stand second to none in the healthy condition of our Treas-
ury, and the introduction here of a criminal hatching ma-
chine, for such the bell punch will prove itself, making a
premium on dishonesty, is an outrage on the pride, the dig-
nity, and the integrity of our people. We do not object to a
more stringent retail license law, as that we believe will pro-
tect the better class of trade, and at the same time increase
the revenue of the State, but we do object to the imposition
of a tax on the manufactures, and on the sales of the whole-
sale dealers, as it will debar us from competing with dealers
of our neighboring States, and it will result in the crushing
out of every distillery and brewery in the State, driving trade
from our midst, owing to manufacturers and dealers from,
abroad, not burdened with an onerous tax, underselling us.

Again is presented one of the fallacious arguments of the
opposition ; "The license revenue is not needed by the State
of Maryland." Our reply we take from Comptroller Wool-
ford's report of 1874: "That should Local Option prevail it
would be necessary to raise the sum by direct and increased
taxation with an extra Session of the Legislature."

We reiterate in conclusion, that class legislation is oppres-
sive, obnoxious and in defiance of the constitutional rights of