"Hatchet-Bearing Females"

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

J. N. Leonard '25 suspects B. H. Noyes '02 of being a Prohibitionist!-- as if that were an exceptionally odious species of scheming oppressors for whom --to use his words--"there was no law too sacred for them to break" providing it would further their ends.

In argumentation, it is puerile to dwell on exceptions, they prove nothing and get one nowhere. No movement for the betterment of society has been able to escape the overt acts of simple-minded fanatics. Merely because of the actions of the militant suffragettes is it to be maintained that woman suffrage is bad and was brought about by low-down methods? If it is not, then how can any self respecting person with a college trained mind maintain that prohibition was put over on the people by illegal methods because of the acts of the "hatchet-bearing females"?

This whole Prohibition business is a case of preventing the continuance of a disease in the future rather than an attempt to cure those unfortunates who have fallen prey to its ravages. It may take two or three generations, but eventually there will be no more parched throats in need of alcoholic lubrication. Those responsible for this law, so odious to the selfish and narrow minded, had in mind its effects on future generations. Mr. Leonard speaks of the great test of popular approval but does not seem to be able to look beyond his own nose. Since the primary benefit was expected to accrue to those yet unborn, five years is no test at all. It is up to us to lay aside our appetites and personal desires to an increasing extent as we progress toward the ideal of society, else we shall retrogress or at best stand still.

Reform is essential to progress and we cannot expect to see the proofs of our reforms during our lives. Therefore we must do all within our powers to hand on at least a decent beginning to the next generation.