Mineral Point tribune. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1854-1858, 1854-04-20


generally aelnaitted-to be unconstitution-
al. In addition to all this, there was a
! possbility-a probability-that such n
submission would render the whole law
unconstitutional in the opinion of our
courts. even should It escape the veto of
) the Governor
Under these circumstances, the friends
OF the bill consulted together, and deter
mined that their only course was to
oppose this impolitic and unjust provision
They were firmly of the opinion that it
was far better to trust to the people the
selection of men who would truly repre-
sent their feelings on this subject, in the
next Legislature. and whs would pass
this law without rendering it liable to any
such constitutional objections. than to
ascede to the amendmentsof the Senate
committee of conference, however, was
appointed upon the disagreeing vote of
the two Houses, consisting of six mem
bers-three from Senate two of whom
were hostile to the principle of Prohib-
ltory Law, but in favor of the submission
clause, and one friendly to such law, but
opposed to submission; and three from
the Assembly, all favorable to the law and
opposed to submission. Thus the COM
mlttee consisted of four friends of the
law, opposed to submission, and two enc
mics OF 1t, IN favor of submission
The committee consulted together for
purpose Of agreeing upon some comprom-
lse. But the two members hostile to the
bill refused to make any concession what
ever to the wishes of those who opposed
the submission clause, in it's very odious
ba To- f,I+
the majority, that something should be
yielded by their opponents. The submis-
sion clause had barely passed the Senate
By a vote of thirteen to twelve it was
stricken out in the House by the decisive
vote OF forty-four to twentysix. Still,
IN their desire to secure the passage of
the law which had been emphatically call
ed for by vote of the people at the bal
!ot-box, its friends in the committee were
finally induced to yield almost everything
10 the demands of the Senate. They
proposed to strike out the section contain
ing the submission clause, and insert an
other providing thai the act should 90
into effect on the first day of February,
1855 and that, at the general election
next fall, the people should vote on the
question of its repeal If there should
be majority for repeal, the succeeding
Legislature would of course repeal it; if
not, the vote would be in the nature of
an instruction to that body against repeal
Here was delay, longer even than its OPP
ponents asked, and a vote of the people.
which would test their sentiments in re-
gard 20 the law just as truly as the other
+stio 4 ef - ...issIol1, a..I --;.,4aa. ~a--
dering it obnoxious to the constitutional
objection which would be incurred by con-
ferring Legislature p0tcer upon the people
Every demand of the Senate was fully
complied with, except the violation of the
constitution. ac}tich 1could renter IL the
imperative dutY Of the G0cer23or TO geto
the enactment Its friends had yielded
everything bat this, had gone farther than
they ought IN justice to their constituents
yet their proposition, which went beyond
tirmness, was recited and they were
frankly told that the opponents of the
bill were willing to take advantage of any
unconstitutionality which might attach to
the law by the proposed mode of submis
sion In making that proposition, they
had gone to the extreme limit which their
own ideas of propriety, or which their du-
ty to their constituents would allow They
were satisfied that no compromise could
be agreed upon, and accordingly the ma
jority of the committee reported in favor
of striking out the submission clause
the minority in favor of retaining it. The
Senate adopted the report of the latter,
the Assembly that of the former
1t is the intention of the opposition in
dubitably, to prevert these facts, and
to endeavor to place the real friends of
the law, in both Houses, in false light
before the people, respecting their action
on this bill. The work of misrepresenta-
tion has already begun 1t is already
limited that the measure failed through the
obstlnancy of its advocates We ask ev-
cry rejecting man, every true friend of
the Temperance Reform, to read the
facts we have here narrated, and which
cannot be gainsayed, and we are ready
to abide his decision, and stand convicted
or acquitted of the implied charge, accor-
ding to his deliberate judgement upon
, the facts here presented,
In conclusion, we have but few sug-
gestions to make The subject of a. Pro
hibitory Liquor Law will again be agitated
at the coming November election. and
probably cause more excitement than at
any time heretofore The prospect of
success is not at all discouraging This
year the people have only to elect
House favorable to it, as they did last
year, and seven members of the Senate
out of the thirteen to be elected, who are
true on the law, and its enactment is GER
= tain The cause of its defeat at the late
} session, was chiefly owing to the fact that
one half of the Senators held over from
last year. and were chosen without ref
erence to this measure. A majority of
them happened to be opposed to it, and
thus the bill failed to become law The
4 members Of the next Legislature will
probably all be chosen with more or less
regard to their vote on this measure; and
If the people are true to themselves, and
vote consistently with their own profess
ions, their representatives viii comply
e with their demands If they do not. the
. l.. Il Tx L