for the last 38 years. Our community, like
many ethers, has been agitated with the Mai ne
Law question this winter, and so warm have
some of our consequential become, that the
subject li as been debated, and such overwhelm
ing arguments have been brought against the
law, that I thought best to give them to you
for publication. The “farmer” somewhere,
[who wrote against the law in your paper before
; the election, affirmed, “that the Maine Liquor
• Law is unconstitutional, and anti-republican.”
The most powerful argument that “farmer”
used was that it took private property for pub
lic use. Wonderful! what use to the public
is liquor in the glitter, 16t us see that a little
further : There is a book ped’er with a load
of obscene books, calculated, to corrupt the
| morals of our youths ; he is selling them to
! our sons and daughters ; what’s to be done ?
! why the law says take them and burn them.—
i The somewhere Farmer would say it is uncon
stitutional. Take auother case : here is a man
I guilty of some crime-say theft, or murder ;
j he is running at large, community is in dan
!ger; what is to be done? Why stop his
depredations as soon as possible ; have him ta
| ken and the law executed by imprisonment or
I hanging. Private Property for Public use
i with a vengeance 1 Now, Mr. Editor, I ask
I you and your honest readers if the three cases
(are not similar? I was not at the debate, but
with that powerful argument, got the case. I
'wonder who the judges were ? Rotten argu
ments in support of - a rotten case.
A Farmer Here.
