The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1882-09-08
HARRISON.
A Powerful Speech by the Indiana
Senator.
An Honest Mans Utterances as Com.
pared with the Equiyocation
Of Demagogues.

/ campaign for the Republicans by an able
! two-hours' speech at the Opera House, il
indianapolis, on the Seth ult Gov. Porter
presided, and an immense audience was in
/ attendance.
4 Beginning with touching and appropriate
reference to the death of President Garfield.
! Senator Harrison passed to the considera-
ton of the constitutional amendments rela-
tiTe to the prohibition Of the liquor traffic.
He said:
do not think can recall any matter re-
lating to State affairs that has so powerfully
moved the minds of our people as the pend
ing question of the submission of the con
stltutional amendments proposed by the last
Legislature to the vote of the people. Since
THIS issue was presented, my own position
upon 1t has never been the subject of debate.
even in my own mind. The course which
our party should take has from the begin
nln9 seemed to me too plain for any Repub-
hcan to lose his way. Not that it was so
PLAIN that the DemOcr9 Tic leaders might not
miss it; | was sure they would, and they
have A ten-ran fence on both sides would
not sufficiently mark road for them
The hand of cunning workman is clearly
revealed.in the resolution in the Democratic
platform relating to the prohibitory amend
ment Two widely divergent views upon the
subject OF this amendment had shown them
selves among Democrats. One large class,
EN- orac1ng those directly connected with the
liquor Traffic, demanded of the platform
makers clear declaration against the sub
MISSION OF the amendments to popular vote
These We're SO near and noisy that the lead
ing Democrats at Indianapolis who stood
with their hands to their ears heard but one
voice. They said: 1t is unanimous: we will
strangle the amendment in the Legislature, ,"
Under this banner they carried this township
at the April election, and with increasing
noise, said: "We shall sweep the State upon
this issue"
The Shelbyville Convention offered the
next occasion for restatement of the doc
Urine, and emphasis was then given it.
The Sentinel said of the convention: @The
platform if adopted has the right ring. It
clears the air OF political malaria. 1t silences
uouDG and lnv1gorates the mind forces of
the people. But political malaria went on
TO Go Its sad work among Democrats 1t in
fec5ed the committeeman at the State Con-
Ventlon and threw it's members into an acme
But, when this tumult near at hand had
somewhat spent ITSELF like the clamor of
the mob at Ephesus, voices from the rural
districts began to be heard by these gentle
men at Indianapolis. They were very calm
voices, but very reasonable and very resolute.
1t was clear that the Shelbyville platform
would divide the party. large, conscien-
tious and determined body of Democrats
scattered over the whole State, having no
personal ends to subServe-nioved hv con-
vlctions, not passioDs-demanded a submits
sion OF the amendments to a popular vote.
Some OF these were open advocates of pro-
intuition; others simply stood for what Jhey
had been taught to be sound, old-fashioned
Democratic doctrnes-viz that the people
are the source of all political power-the
makers and masters of Legislatures; that a
majority of the people, acting by methods
prescribed to themselves, have the right to
amend the constitution; a popular vote is
the best test of the popular will.
A Two-FACED IMAGE.
And now, as so often before, the managers
found themselves under the necessity of
facing both ways on this question The
choice of Mr.. Hendricks to manage this bus
mess was wise one. He had wide and
well-deserved reputation as a skillful per
former in such feats, and the work produced
In this instance will not impair, but rather
increase, his reputation.
Let rs examine this skillful piece of dodg-
Ing, They are in favor of submitting the
amendment to vote of the people-that
has candid face, looking toward the sub
mission Democrats. Mr.. Hendricks skillful
composition, helped by his graceful elocu-
ton, made that appear quite satisfactory to
at least one prohibitionist nearer when he
read it to the convention. 1t was a great
triumph Of pen and tongue to deceive
though but for a moment, an earnest hon
est woman.
But now the other face of this political ind
age-that looking toward the Liquor-Deal
erS' AssOtiatiOn-is to be set UP. The ap-
parently fair and honest declaration for sub
mission is qualified as follows: According
to the provisions of the constitution for it's
1n,1+3 l,o+ g.
OF submitting it to avote of the people if the
next Legislature agrees to pass it on to the
people. What a neat and vet transparent
dodge. Ii the neXt Legislature agrees to
submit the amendment to a popular vote. it
is then of small consequence whether the
Democratic party is in favor of or opposed to
submission The demand of the Liquor
Dealers Association was that the amend
ment be killed in the next Legislature-the
! demand of the submissionists was that the
Legislature pass the amendment on to a pop
ular vote Which side of this question does
this platform take? If Mr.. Hendricks were
member of the next Legislature and had
sufficient respect for his own platform to
make it the guide of his action as legislator
would he feel himself bound to vote for or
against the submission of the amendment to
popular vote? | fancy, if he governed his
action strictly by the platform he would go
into the lobby and dodge the vote
But there is something more in the plat
form upon this subject-"the people have
the right to oppose or favor the adoption OF
any or all the amendments at all stages of
their consideration Of course they have,
but has the Democratic party no policy to
announce? 1t has declared very plainly
against the adoption of the amendment but
does it intend, as party, to make that OPP
position now, in the selection of members OF
the legislature and in that body when as
! = Il, l1o
fore the people to be voted on directly?
When does Mr.. Hendricks intend to make
his opposition as a Democratic citizen?
| When does his platform advise to make it?
| He ought to be able to explain his own work.
! Suppose some supplemented and conhdlng
Democrat who accepts Platforms with un-
| questioning faith, and who believes IN MI
/ Hendricks, should ask him whether, accord
! ing to the platform, he ought to vote in the
| primary for Legislative candidate who
! would vote to submit the amendment to the
/ people, or for one who would not, how could
/ he answer him and leave the mans faith in
! platforms and party leaders mistaken? A
two-faced image may be set up, and those
| who look from opposite points of observa-
| ton may each see a face that pleases them
and render their worship. But the priests
| of such a god are in constant peril Some
curious worshiper may change his point OF
observation. And if the god leads a crusade,
one face must move backward The two
horse act in the circus is an interesting exhi-
bition of the balancing power Of the rider,
I but you have noticed that he always gets off
where he got on-he never goes anywhere.
| The Democratic party on this platform
may have the support, but it cannot have
the respect either of the liquor men or the
! submission Democrats
THE REPUBLICANS SPEAK PLAINLY.
The position of the Republican party on
the question of submission is in no doubt.
The resolution on that subject needs no
study or analysis to get at its meaning 1t
is a plain, blunt declaration in favor of sub
hitting the amendments to popular vote.
1t goes upon the ground that if majority of
the qualified voters of the State desire to in
corporate these amendments-one or all
into the constitution, they have the right
to do so, and that it is neither wise nor safe
for any political party to shrink or evade a
fair test of the popular will upon these ques-
lions. And there is no fair test. except the
popular vote, in which each elector speaks
for himself A representative chosen by q
majority of one cannot express upon this
question the divided will of his constituency,
and upon the diverse questions presented by
the several amendments it is practically i'm
possible that he should even accurately re-
cord the will of those by whose votes he was
chosen.
NOT PARTISAN QUESTION
The prohibitory amendment could not have