, 1874-12-14

Ill tIlc IG!liiS u4 COMMUNICATIONS NO nave
recently received from tho prolibitionists
there is one 7invarying line of argument com.
mon to all which deserves some attention,
Scarcely writer Inns takon his pen in de-
fenso of Prohibition without instituting d
comparison between his hobby md slavery,
When The TRIBUNE points out the impossi-
bility Of restricting aud debating to a mon il,
oating and drinking By coercive legislation,
it is met with the universal reply that it was
deemed impossible tosuppress slavery, and yet
this grent national crime was stamped ont.
Did not the Abolitionists mcet with the sun,o
discouragoncnts, when they commenced their
agitation, as the Prol.ibitionists do now ?
We're they not llooted ut md prosecuted
Did not oven peaccab1o and respectable citi-
zens argue the folly Of establishing third
party? Yet tho Abolitionists worked on year
utter year, aud at last their work was crowned
with success aud slavery was abolished.
Tho argument would be good one if the
cases were parallel, but unfortunately for tho
argument there is ITO analogy between tho
two. Tho lines constantly diverge, aud tile
reasoning which applies to the Quo docs not
HlI4p sS Asao S%4IAs A44t ECl.
ditionB, moral relations, I'LL differ Slavery
existed only in iiftcen States out of the thirty
four or five, aud in these fifteen it was
marked by essential differences in tho num-
ber and treatinent of slaves md in senti-
monts relative to the oriininality of slavery.
Tho Abolitionists, therefore, had starting
point in twenty free States, base of oper-
ations, sentiment upon which they could
work. and, oven III the border slave Statcu
themselves, there was slight sentiment to
whicl. thoy could appeal, which, although
powerless and feeble in itself, WINS neyortlo-
less m entering wedge Which helped to
cleayo the institution when the blows
OF the OK calno. But how long
would it haye taken tho Abolitionists
to nbolish slavery if it had existed in overy
State aud Territory of the Union, and ninety
nine out Of every hundred men had owned
slnvas in thirty-tiyo States, inbtual Of two to
eight men out Of every hundred in fifteen
states? Slavery was irregularly scattered
over q section OF the Union. All tho rest
was free Of it. But liquor in somo form or
other is to DO found in every Stnte, in every
county, township, city, yillago, md school
district, and in almost every house through
out the Union. The Prohibitionists, there
fore, have no starting-point aB did tic Aboli-
tionista. There is no district or State where
thore are not drinkers Of liquor. In the very
States where the Prohibitionists are strong.
est and have sought the hardest to create
ouch sentiment by coorciyo legislation, US
III Purtanical Maine, Vermont, and Alassa-
chusotts, they failed utterly after mora thun
a generation Of effort and agitnsion, not only
to prevent drinking, but to reduce drunkon-
ness.
The only why in which tho two oasos could
bo analogous would bo something like this:
Suppose TINT the use aud manufacture of
lquor woYo confined to fifteen States, aud
TINT tho other twenty-five Statos used only
cold water. Suppose TINT party should
arise in tho teototnl 8tates and, commence
agitating for tho abolition Of liquor drinking
in tho Tosritories only, because they AFRO CON-
pletoly under the control Of Congress aud tho
Government anl TINT tAoreupou tho fifteen
liquor drinking states in resentment for this
proposal prohibitory legislation in tho Terri
tories, should hold convention aud reuolyo
to sooede aud break MP the Union, and noxt
to put their threats into fosaa by firing On