Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1874-08-13

/ ACoNAC EkOCA NAAAASO
| The Temperance picnic held at Rocb
Mills on Tuesday last under the auspices
of the Woman's League, presided over by
Mrs. Judge Priddy, was well attended
When we arrived on the ground at two
p. m, Hon. J. B. Priddy, was addressing
the audience. He discussed many points
of the New Constitutio ably, regarded it
superior to the old one in many respects
and inferior in none, while he admitted
that many good temperance men would
believing that by licensing the traffic, it
could be better controlled, he was decid-
edly in favor of and should vote for No
License, believing that to be the safest.
When Judge Priddy closed, Rev. Mr..
Mitchell, of Greenfield, was introduced to
the audience, and addressed the people
principally upon the question of License
or No License, and gave good reasons
why the people of Ohio should on Tues
day next give their votes for the adoption
of the No License article in the New Con-
stitution on Tuesday next. When Mr..
Nit chell resumed his seat and after Mr..
Steen sang a beautiful and appropriate
temperance song, which he accompanied
with music on one of his superior EsteY
Organs, Mrs. Madison Pavey was intro
duced upon the stand, and gave truthful
and interesting history of the origin and
success of the Woman's crusade upon the
liquor traffic in this town, from its COM
mencement last December to the present
date; after which she presented the ques-
ton Of License or No License, and like
true woman, who felt the Importance of a
great moral reformation throughout the
country, was opposed to taking any back
ward steps in the great temperance refor-
nation. To vote for license would be a
backward movement, she therefore, hoped
that every one who held ballot in his
hand, would cast it on Tuesday next for
the No License article proposed in the
New Constitution.
When Mrs. Pavey closed her very in
teresting remarks, Madison Pavey, Esq,
was called to the stand. The hour had
became late and he was obliged to speak
hurriedly on the topics of the New Con-
stitution. He, however, took up a num-
Der of the provisions in the New COnsti
tuition, compared them with similar ones
in the Old, and we think that to one di-
vested of preconceived prejudic es showed
satisfactory as did Judge Priddy, that the
Oau Conct;tut;or ub;Io in DaorIv nvarv
respect it was decided improvement on the
old One was not inferior to it in a single
point On the question of License or No
License, Mr.. Pavey advocated the adop
ton of the No Lice Ese article in the New
Constitution, and gave reasons for his ad-
vocating of that side of the question that
we think cannot be successfully contro
verted.
We hope that Mr.. P. will be able to
make several speeches in the county on
the questions involved in the New Consti-
tuition, before the election. Many persons
condemn the New Constitution without
readingit it or knowing what its propositions
really are-pronounce it inferior to the old
one when they have read neither o them,
and really know no more what is contained
in the old than in the new one. But
somebody has said the new one is a
swindle, and that it will increase the ex-
penditures of the State SO that taxes will
have to be increased. This certainly is a
mistake, but everybody should read the
Constitutions, both Old and New, and COM
pare their relative merits, unprejudiced,
and then vote as their Judgment may die
tate the best for the interests of the whole
nennln