DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, HENRY H. LYMAN, Commissioner, To the Honorable Legislature of the State of New York: I respectfully present herewith the first report of the State Excise Department, showing its organization and financial and executive transactions since April 2, 1896, also a concise history of the liquor traffic legislation in this State since its earliest days. H. H. LYMAN, State Commissioner of Excise. Preface and History of Department Organization. STATE OF NEW YORK: DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, ALBANY, January 15, 1897. } Although unable to find any statute requiring a report from this Department, yet, in conformity with time-honored custom and on account of the respect due your honorable body, I herewith present a report in detail of the business and transactions of this Department. On account of the newness of the Department and the law under which it was created, I deem it proper to give a brief history of its organization before presenting my formal report of its business and operations. The financial part of this report is made for the six months ending September 30, 1896, having reference to the fiscal year. Various statistics and details of the Department's business transactions for eight months, or to December 1, 1896, are furnished, believing that the same will be desirable information. Chapter 112 of the Laws of 1896, entitled " An act in relation to traffic in liquors and for the taxation and regulation of the same, and to provide for local option," was duly passed and became a law of the State of New York, March 23, 1896, and, under its provisions, the present commissioner was appointed and confirmed April 1, 1896. With the passage of this act, a new and unexampled era opened upon the liquor traffic of the State. The multitude of ably supported theories and policies for its conduct, control, restriction or prohibition has been a constant source of variance and conten tion in nearly every legislative body and among all classes of our citizens since the formation of our State government, and the colonial records disclose the fact that it was one of the most vexatious questions which confronted and perplexed those in authority at that time. The magnitude of the traffic and the enormous profits derived therefrom; the direct and indirect damage and crime caused thereby at all times, especially under laws which have been easily and notoriously violated or evaded through the greed of those in its pursuit, and the inefficiency or indifference of public officials charged with the law's execution, has made this a question which has engaged the earnest attention of political economists, statesmen and legislators for centuries past. That this momentous social, moral and business question, with so many features peculiar to itself, seemed almost impossible of practical and satisfactory solution and settlement, is shown by the constantly changing laws governing the same. It is a fact, however, that whatever phase the question assumed, or however the laws relating thereto have been changed, one feature seems to have been quite constant and one sentiment almost universal, viz.: That the traffic should contribute to the public revenue; and the present law in its provisions for regulating the trade brings this feature into special prominence. Prior to the passage of this law, the liquor traffic of the State had been solely conducted under licenses granted by local officials, of which there were existing 37 city, 925 town and two village boards; 11 towns reporting that they had no boards of excise and thereby showing a total disregard of the law for their election. Many towns were found within the borders of the State in which the liquor traffic was carried on without any reference to, or observation of, the then existing excise law; in some localities |