Debate of April 19, 1894.Question: "Resolved, That the bill before the Massachusetts legislature, granting to wns the privilege of establishing the Norwegian system of controlling the liquor traffic, should become a law."

Brief for the Affirmative.W. E. Cobb and E. A. Howes, Jr.

Best general reference: Report of the Mass. Commission appointed to investigate the Norwegian system, pp. 6-15, pp. 148-174.

Other references: Forum, XIV, 514; Review of Reviews, VIII, 549; Atlantic Mo. Oct. '93.

I. The Norwegian system corrects existing evils, such as (a) incentive to large sales and sales to minors, (b) large number of bar-rooms, (c) selling on credit, (d) bar-room loafing.

II. It opens the whole business of liquor selling to public inspection.

III. It takes the liquor traffic out of politics and places it in the hands of trustworthy people.

IV. The pending bill does not force the system upon unwilling communities, but allows local option.

V. The system is elastic enough to fit the needs of every community.

VI. The system, as tried in Sweden and Norway for twenty years, has been successful.

Brief for the Negative.E. C. Bradlee and D. J. Gallert.

I. The system is a step away from prohibition. (a) Many towns would give up prohibition to try it since it is something new and directly or indirectly reduces taxation. (b) Once adopted it must stand for three years.

II. The experience of Norway does not apply to the scheme proposed since the Norwegian system does not include malt liquors.

III. It would be difficult to enforce the law: (a) Kitchen bar-rooms and pocket peddlers. (b) Americans object to espionage. (c) Possibility of sale through (1) prescriptions and (2) clubs.

IV. It gives opportunity for corruption. (a) In the awarding of the franchise. (b) In the patronage at the disposal of the corporation. (c) In the disposition of the profits.