Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-12-24

for the modern politician to challenge Its
power. But to present his views in brief
we may say that he assumes the right OF
society to restrict as no longer debatable.
There remains therefore but the question
of need and of method. OF the first So
ciety will make itself the sole Judge; as to
! the second, there are two avenues to the
end he believes will soon be reached, IL
cense or prohibition and as no evil was
ever conquered by liberation, he concludes
that prohibition is the sole remedy.
Whatever is property and an article of
commerce in any State or Territory, or in
any foreign country, which seeks transmits
sion, anywhere in the entire domain of the
country, is under the protection of the law
and the army and navy of the United
| States, he holds, and as he deems the
State lines but geographical at best, and as
| the National Government is the great ally
and protector of alcohol, therefore the
battle for prohibition in the States mustIal-
failure, until the Federal Constitution is
amended or rebellion sets in. But public
opinion is formed in the States, and
through efforts made under State Govern
ments, and 80 the State exertions to work
reform are important; but before there
will be achievement these efforts must
concentrate and crystalline in national law.
He believes the ant-lquor sentiment
can easier carry the nation than the in
dividual States. The complete logic of any
prohibitory reform must lead to suppression
of the manufacture in fact, it is the step
precedent, he claims. It ia far easier, he
continues, to suppress manufacture than to
control the sale of an article. But the main
point of the article is the word to the par
ties This bold Senator of the United
States believes the parties would prolong
their own existence if they would SO far
defer to the temperance sentiment as to
submit to the States an amendment to the
Constitution on the subject of prohibition.
In other words, he believes the anti-hquor
by the party leaders. The Democratic party
will be least embarrassed, he maintains,
but even that organization finds that
in the South there is a troublesome demand
to make liquor an issue. We cannot agree
with the Senator that the time is ripe for
the Republican party to present this issue
as one of its articles of faith The time
may come-possibly will within the next
twenty years-when party lines will be
drawn upon such a scale, but to interject
into any national party now the prohibition
and suppression question, means the solidi-
flying of elements antagonistic sufficient to
crush the party. 1t might be chivalrous,
but it would certainly bring present defeat.
When The country is ripe for it, the Repub-
lican party, as the exponent and represent
alive of the best sentiment of the nation,
will not be found wanting in the courage
necessary to accomplish progressive results.
But at this time, and until the States have
handled the matter more successfully than
in the past, the liquor question as a national
party question is not to be thought of
The amendment Senator Blair proposes
to the Federal Constitution, we may add as
matter of information, calls for suppression
of manufacture after the year 1900, except
for medicinal, mechanical, chemical and
scientific purposes; also prohibition of
transmission of liquors through the ooun-
try except for the purposes named. It
declares that the right of no State shall be
infringed to enac. laws for the suppression
or regulation of the liquor traffic.