第 28 节
作者:
谁与争疯 更新:2021-02-19 00:36 字数:9320
In Kansas every liquor selling place is not only a declared nuisance;
but a constitutional outlaw。 And in the case from Pennsylvania
where a private individual had abated a nuisance; the court held: 〃We
consider it also well settled; as is claimed by this defendant; that a common
nuisance may be removed; or; in legal language; abated by any individual。
Any man; says Lord Hale; may justify the removal of a common
nuisance; either by land or by Nyater; because every man is concerned in
it。〃
It is not only the privilege of the patriotic citizen to abate a dangerous
nuisance but it is commendable。 Bishop on Criminal Law; paragraph
1081; says: 〃This doctrine (of abatement of a public nuisance by an
individual) is an expression of the better instincts of our natures; which
lead men to watch over and shield one another from harm。〃
〃The buildings; premises and paraphernalia of a nuisance are not
legitimate property and have no rights in law。 Damages cannot be recovered
for their destruction by an individual。 The question of malice does
not enter into the case at all。〃
I Bishop's Criminal Law 828; I Hilliard on Torts; 605。
〃At common law it was always the right of a citizen; without official
authority; to abate a public nuisance; and without waiting to have it
adjudged such by legal tribunal。 His right to do so depended upon the
fact of its being a nuisance。 If be assumed to act upon his own adjudication
that it was; and such adjudication was afterwards shown to be
wrong; he was liable as a wrong…doer for his error; and appropriate damages
could be recovered against him。 This common law right still exists
in full force。 Any citizen; acting either as an individual or as a public
official under the orders of local or municipal authorities; whether such
orders be or be not in pursuance of special legislation or charter provisions;
may abate what the common law deemed a public nuisance。 In
abating it; property may be destroyed; and the owner deprived of it
without trial; without notice and without compensation。 Such destruction
for public safety or health is not a taking of private property for
public uses without compensation; or due process of law; in the sense
of the constitution。 It is simply the prevention of its noxious and unlawful
use; and depends upon the principle that every man must so use his
property as not to injure his neighbors; and that the safety of the public
is the paramount law。 These principles are legal maxims or axioms
essential to the existence of regulated society。 Written constitutions
presuppose them; are subordinate to them; and cannot set them aside。〃
These great principles of civil jurisprudence and popular government
apply alike in every state in the Union。 An eminent jurist; Judge
James Baker; of Evanston; Ill。; formerly a resident of Missouri; gives
his professional opinion of the late crusading by the women there。 He
maintains that it was legal; he points out that the saloons raided; at
Denver and Lathrop; were unlawful and that they were 〃nuisances at
common law。〃 He quotes Illinois law as follows: 〃As the summary
abatement of nuisances is a remedy which has ever existed in the law;
its exercise cannot be regarded as in conflict with constitutional provisions
for the protection of the rights of private property and giving
trial by jury。 Formal legal proceedings and trial by jury are not appropriate
and have never been used in such cases。〃 Judge Baker sums up
the case thus: 〃The women who destroyed such property are not criminals。
They have the same right to abate such common nuisances as men
have to defend their persons or domiciles when unlawfully assailed。 As
the women of that state are denied the right to vote or hold office; I
think they are fully justified; morally and legally; in protecting their
homes;
their families; and themselves from the ravages of these demons of vice
in the summary manner which the law permits。〃
More citations might be given proving the legality of joint smashing
by the crusaders; but the foregoing is ample; for all fairminded; loyal
people。 Had the joint smasher's cases been tried on their merits; not one
would have been convicted of a misdemeaner。 They were arrested; tried;
convicted; imprisoned and fined for disturbing the 〃peace〃 of a common
nuisance; and 〃malicious〃 destruction of rebel paraphernalia。 Their only
intent was against the treasonable liquor traffic。 Had there been no liquor
dispensing there had been no smashing。 This the liquorized courts would
not admit for a moment。 Every ruling was a burlesque on civil law; a
travesty on justice and a contemptible farce。 The whole proceedings
from beginning to end were a miserable outrage。
DECAY AND DECLINE OF THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC。
Today the country is ringing with the cry of political bribery; boodle
and official corruption; from the highest to the lowest。 The rum traffic
is the principal factor in demoralizing and destroying the dignity; honor
and integrity of civic life。 It is the insidious foe that is hatching and
nursing crime。 Startling complication of statistics; obtained from the
replies of over 1;000 prison governors in the United States to a circular
letter addressed to them; and a summary shows that the general average
of 909 replies received from the license states; gives the proportion of
crime due to drink at no less than seventy…two per cent; the average
from 108 officials in Prohibition states giving the per centage at thirty…
seven。 A considerable number of the latter were 〃boot…leggers〃 in jail
for selling whiskey。 Out of the 1;017 jailers; only 181 placed their estimate
below twenty…five per cent; and fifty…five of these were from empty
jails in prohibition territory。 The relation of drink to pauperism is much
the same as that of drink to crime。 Of 73;045 paupers in all the alms…
houses of the country; 37;254 are there through drink。
According to official statistics as gathered by Commissioner Carroll
D。 Wright; of the Bureau of Labor; there are 140 cities in the country
having a population of 30;000 and upwards。
In these cities there were in 1898; 294;820 people arrested for drunkeness;
almost ten times as many as now comprise our army in the Philippines。
If this great army of drunkards were marshalled for a parade; marching
twenty abreast; it would require four and one…half days; marching
ten hours a day; for them to pass a given point。 And these 295;000
drunks do not include the arrests for 〃disorderly conduct;〃 〃assault〃 and
a dozen other offences which grow out of the licensed rum business。 The
total arrests for all causes in these cities was 915;167。 Counting the
moderate
estimate of three…fourths of these as being the victims of the lawful saloons;
it would require more than a week's marching twenty abreast;
for the great procession to stagger past a reviewing stand; and the rum
product of only 140 cities heard from。
These appalling statistics are the common property of every citizen;
and any political party pretending to financial improvement that ignores
the sixteen hundred million dollars worse than squandered in liquor and
tobacco annually in the United states; is untrue to itself and false to the
nation。 Gambrinus; the god Bacchus; the Rum Power; this Moloch of
perdition; must be destroyed。 Prohibition is the only remedy。 Kansas
is to be the battle ground。 Her constitutional prohibitory law and statutory
enactments are all right; properly administered。 But in the hands
of a republican whiskey 〃machine〃 with the governor belonging to the
Elks; a liquor fraternity; a confessed defaulter as state treasurer; a
United states senator under indictment for bribery; officials from the
state house to every county in complicity with the whiskey rebels; it
will not be enforced。 The liquor men and joint keepers subscribe large
sums to campaigns with the tacit; implied or open understanding of
immunity from prosecution and punishment on the part of candidates
and officials。 This has been going from bad to worse for twenty years。
Yet the law is so plain that he who runs may read。 How many ever saw
it in print。 The revised statutes of Kansas; 1901; Article 14; Section 2462;
reads: 〃It shall be the duty of all sheriffs; police officers; constables;
mayors; marshals; police judges and police officers of any city or town;
having notice or knowledge of any violation of the provisions of this
act to notify the county attorney of the fact of such violation and to
furnish him names of witnesses within his knowledge by which such
violation can be proven。 If any such officer shall fail to comply with the
provisions of this section; he shall; upon conviction; be fined in any sum
not less than 100 or more than 500; and such conviction shall be a
forfeiture
of the office held by such person; and the court before whom such
conviction is had shall; in addition to the imposition fine aforesaid; order
and adjudge the forfeiture of his said office。 For a failure or neglect of
official duty in the enforcement of this act; any of the city or county
officers herein referred to may be removed by civil action。〃
Also Article 6; Section 2212; says: 〃Any officer of the state or