The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1879-02-13
Local Option.

AOSo4 " PUAOA'
To the Editor of the Standard
Mr.. Austin, in his last, tacitly admit
all the facts which l adduced showing
that the Republican party is fully pledg
ed to the rum interests, and also, admit
that the doctrine and laws of the Chris
tian churches are in conformity with the
doctrine of the Prohibition party. This
admission precludes the necessity of my
presenting other facts which l have ir
reserve And to refute his statement
that the number of the Prohibition party
IS fixed, I will give the figures showing
the increase of the vote. G. Clay Smith
in 1876, received 1886, in Ohio. III. A
Thompson in 1877 received 1886, J. N
Robinson in 1878 received 5674, showing
an increase of $50 per cent By compar-
ing the Free Soil vote from 1912, to 1851
the increase was nearly 23O per cent,
showing that the increase of the Prohi
bltion vote in two years, was twenty per
cent more than the increase of the Free
Soil vote in nine years. And yet in 1855
Chase, who was the President of the first
abolition convention held in Ohio, was
elected Governor by $4,000 majority. II
the Republican party in 18S0is controlled
by the Brewers Congress as it has been
since 1872, the increase of the Prohibi-
ton vote will equal that of the Free Soil
party of 1855
If any one is SO ignorant as to believe
the statement that the Prohibition party
has but one idea, all that is necessary to
dispel this delusion is to examine the
| Ohio platform, which contains sixteen
resolutions, nearly all of which embody
some grand political reform. The merits
| of these resolutions (by the kindness of
the editor) l will discuss in future arti-
cles.
Mr.. Austin advises Prohibitionists to
vote for Local Option" and thus take
the temperance question out of politics.
Local option will not have this effect as
shown by the history. In 1873, petitions
signed by 100000 voters moved the Leg
islature of Pennsylvania to pass local
option law. 43 counties of the 65
voted to prohibit the manufacture, and
sale of all Intoxicating liquors, by DC, 900
majority. Prohibition in these 43 coun-
ties SO materially lessened the sale. that
the whisky brewers congress was called
together to take action in the matter 1t
sent ten of its ablest and most influential
members to the Legislature to secure its
repeal This delegation first went to
the lower house, which was Democratic,
and demanded the repeal of local option,
threatening that if ! did not do so, the
entire liquor vote of the State would be
cast against the Democratic party. To
save this vote, this Democratic Legisla
ture passed the bill repeating local
option. Being stimulated by their sue
cess, they went to the Senate, which was
Republican, and made the same taunting
demand, and threat, and thus secured
the passage of the bill, which was signed
by Gov. Hartranft, and became law.
This enormity was forced upon these 43
counties after they had voted it down by
10000 majority, in order to secure the
whisky vote. This is only one instance
which might be cited by a reference to
the history of local option. I think that
no intelligent man acquainted with this
history, can claim that local option would
take the temperance question out of
politics. No compromise with crime has
ever. or ever will, settle its agitation.
This was tried on the slavery question,
and every attempt only widened the
breach Finally the fiat of God and
Military necessity struck the shackles
from every human being in the United
States The constitution was so amend
ed that none could hold property in man.
and still the question is not settled, and
will not be until all citizens are protected
in the same political rights. The tenn
perance question will be settled in the
same way, by an amendment of the con-
stitntion of the United States, and all the
States of our Union, SO as to prohibit the
manufacture, sale and importation of all
alcoholic liquors, and not then until
every home is protected against the
blighting influence of rum. Suppose
every county in Ohio bordering on the
Ohio river and Lake Erie, and inter
national railroads, should adopt local
option, and prohibit the sale. The traffic
would be largely transferred to these
national thoroughfares, and the people
of these counties would be powerless to
prevent it. No power but the general
government would have the constitu-
tional right to suppress it. How would
it work in Jackson county? Suppose
every township, in the county except
Lick. should adopt it. Would not the
traffic be transferred to this township ?
And from this township would not the
damning influence radiate in every direc-
ton all over our county. and beyond
There are many other objections to local
option laws. 1 think all will admit that
the liquor traffic destroys national wealth,
degrades labor, impairs health, feeds
pauperism. stimulates crime, checks the
advance of christian civilization, and de-
generates the race.
If such is the fact, does not the State
owe protection to all its citizens against
this evil? Would it be sound policy for
the State to abandon any of its citizens
to the rule of debased community
The last objection l shall name is, what
is considered wrong in one community
and light in another loses its moral
force I have pointed out some of the
objections have to local option, but on
the whole think these laws have proven
beneficial, especially in the rural dis
tricts, and acting on the maxim that a
half loaf is better than no bread, and as
a stepping stone to prohibition, not to
take the question out of politics, but tc
keep it in until the right shall gain the
day, l will vote for local option. Will
Mr. Austin do the same?
VIM J. KIRKENDALL
MALLET CREEK, Feb. |, 1879.