New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-08-30
RUM AND JUDGES.
form party

| Some three or four years ago, when apPrehen-
sons of Prohibitory Law began for the first time
10 trouble our Licuor.dealers it was deemed expe-
dent for the first time to get up a public demon
stration against Temperance " ianaticism.' SO
the money was raised, Metropolitan Hall hired,
due arrangements made, and very large meeting
cot up, such as it was. There was some prelimi-
nary speculation as to what gentleman of ade-
quate position and repute, not interested in the
Liquor Traffic, could be induced to preside over
this meeting; for the post was not commonly
deemed q desirable one, even by those who SYM
patbized generally with the meeting. When the
curtain was rung up, ex-Mayor Robert II. Morris
- not then holding any of6ce-sppeared and served
ss President. The next fall, if we mistake not
at any rate, at the next Judicial Election-the
aforesaid Morris received most triumphant Tam
many Hall nomination for the post Of Justice of our
Supreme Court, and was thereupon elected. That
this nomination and election flowed directly from the
Chairmansbip of the Liquor Meeting aforesaid, we
believe was generally undo rstO0d-at all events,
we have never doubted it, There is not man
familiar with the notorious facts who supposes
that had Mr. Morris said to those who applied to
Il cannot, because am against you and in favor OF
"Probibition" would have received that Tam
many nomination. In stating this, we do not init
mate that there was any corrupt bargain made, or
in fact any bargain at all. Mr. Morris naturally
inclined to the Liquor side of the question: he was
required to render it valuable service, and COM
piled and when an opportunity was presented to
the Liquor Den (who mainly manage Primary
eections) to 10 him good turn in response, they
did it, as was right. To have refused would have
been alike ungrateful and suicidal. And for any
body to imagine, after this interchange of good 9TH
ces, that any effective Prohbitory Liquor Act
could be passed which Judge Morris would con-
soer constitutional, is to exhibit amazing ignorance
of the ways of the world.
We are about to have On important election, at
which several Judges are to be chosen-among them
two Justices of the Court of Appeals. BY the de-
cision Of that Court-in other words, according to
the composition of that Court-Liquor Prohibi-
tion is to stand or fall 1t is as sure as sunrise that
no liquor dealer or other voter who heartily sympa-
thizes with the Liquor interest will vote for a
Judge Of Appeals who holds our Prohibitory Act,
or any effective act Of Prohibition, constitutional
nay, the Liquor interest will support no man for
Judge whom il does not believe inclined TO its own
side of the question. The first State Convention
(Hard) has already been held, and has expressly
resolved our Prohibitory Act unconstitutional,
presenting simultaneously two candidates for APP
peal judges, whom, we presume, the Softs will
indorse, passing similar resolutions. Does any
body suppose these candidates, should they be
elected in November viii stultiy their nomination
and knock down their supporters by adjudsing
the Prohibtory Act constitutional Would it be
less than insane to hope for such a decisonl
The advocates of Prohibition have no alternative
in the premises but to meet the issue forced upon
them. They must stand up and fight, or lie down
and die We think we know them we'll enough to
anticipate their choice