The Portland daily press., 1883-02-05

|
| ecution to-day. l repudiate the contract
| repudiate 1t as Republican. repudiate 1t a
| prohibitionist spit upon it. 1 was th,
| supporter Of prohibition in the day when Mr.
Nye and Mr.. Dow and Mr.. Joy were doint
| their utmost to destroy it, The contract wa
it were not worth one thousandth Lpart OF whai
they would cost under that contract. 1t was
contract for the sake of the offices for two
years, to take the ancient constitution Of thil
State down and make it the sport and the ser
want OF a few restless and ambitious hypo
critics. The makers of the Republican platform
have put me and those who stood with me in
the last House, to a hard alternative They
have made it necessary that should eat my
words or publish their shame. They have
made this day for their humiliation or for
mine. propose to make it theirs. My con-
stituents have not returned me here knowing
what said on this floor in the Goth legislature.
with any intention that should surrender
L trust 1t has become evident that do not sur
render. l serve nosice upon the Republican
party not to be too sure of our allegiance. Our
allegiance is not TO be trifled with or traded
away. What wys the following of Messrs. Nye
and Joy In 1889? Joy had 124 votes, Nye, 309-
a53; number about equal to the number of
those inside the Insane Asylum. And they
now propose to put into the Constitution
new thing to be sworn to by every man who
enters the legislature. Now there is a class of
men numbering / think, more than 433, men
OF intelligence, and conscientious men with
whom l disagree. Those men are nor in favor
of prohibition. They believe in license or To-
cal option, or in some other method of restrain
ing or exterminating the evil of intemperapce
Under the constitution as now proposed to be
amended, the man who does now believe in
prohibition is met at the door of this House,
to which the people have sent him, and re-
quired to make oath to enact prohibitory laws
or he cannot enter. A man to be member of
future legislatures of Maine must have a pass
from Joshua Nye. 1t would be an infamous
thing for the majority of the voters to exclude
from the legislature those who disagreed with
tnem upon matters OF police regulations.
think 1t is material for us at this time to con-
sider the character and origin OF that constitu-
ton upon which this assault is made. l
take occasion to summon to its defence the
loyal, and the patriotic, Of the people of
Maine, and especially those among them who
have suffered for it. 1t has come to us from
out the strife OF ages, and time and labor and
wounds and tears and death have hallowed it.
Mr.. Spear of Hallowell replied to the last
speaker. Did this request for this amendment
come from the voice of the people or from the
rabble?" Was it not only from the rabble as
had been remarked, but from the people select
ed and sent to the greatest convent On ever held
IN this State? 1t had been his pleasure to he a
delegate to that convention, composed of 1922
men, men selected from every city, town and
plantation in the commonwealth. Every Re.
publican in the House had been represented
there. When the gentleman Mr. thompson |
asserted that the proposed amendment origina-
ted with 433 men he asserted something which
could not be maintained. That convention was
composed OF the best men in the State. Messrs
Hall and " ison of the House were members
Upon the platform and floor were Senators
Hale and Frye, the Hons. Nelson Dingley and
s. ID Lindsay. More than twenty of the ablest
lawyers In the State were there. Were these
men, selected from every part of the State, the
rabble? Were these men the 1888 who had stood
up and fought the Republican party? He re-
pud1ated the imputaton as directly contrary
10 his views and as direct insult to the 1897
men who composed the convention and voted
without protest in favor of this resolution
This was the source of this proposed amend
ment. The speaker next took up and discussed
briefly the necessity of the proposed amend
ment. 1t was no more trifiiDg to engraft
prohlDltory law upon the constitution than to
engrsft the question of taxation or municipal
Indebtedness upon it. Was it not as important
to the people that prohibition should still exist
as that the people shall not be taxed unless by
vote OF the legislature, or that towns shall
not incur an Indebtedness bey ond a certain
amount? Were those questions Of more impor-
tance than the cause of temperance, which
reaches clear down to the bottom of society?
He desired the amendment so that it might be
taken out OF politics and prevent its being
made the piaything of political parties on the
one hand or the other.
Mr. Eaton of Camden, in answer to the ar
gument that the prohibitory law could be tax.
en- care OF by police regulations, said that DO
lice re- ulstions had failed in almost every case
to carry out the'design of the law Hence, if
1t was based on constitutional amendment,
there would be no probability of petty invas-
IONS OF it and constant cry for change at
every session of the legislature. In reply to the
gentleman an from Bangor he said he respected
no vote OF any political party, because the law
OF temperance is superior to all party md par
ty should not govern votes in this case. The
whipping In OF the people ON account of party
planks was beneath the dignsty of legislators.
Let them act as they talk, upon principles of
ruin ana Justice. He was surprised to hear
on the noor gentlemen who were elected by the
influence OF the Womans' Temperance Union
and who had taken active part in their annual
meetings, say that although they might vote to
submit an amendment to the people they should
not vote for Il at the polls Snch arguments
as these reminded him forcibly of Shakespeare
wi en- be speaks of cause damned with faint
praise" The gentleman from Brunswick said
he had heard him lEaton1 speak four times
upon this subject. He has not heard the speech
four times; but the petitions of $4,000 people
In Maine have made the speech before, and he
must have heard it almost every morning in
the form of the petitions that have been pre-
sented for constitutional amendment
Mr.. Powers OF Houlton had none but the
kindest feelings for the gentlemen who desired
this amendment, and for those who had been
w.
thought they were sincere in their desire to act
for the interests OF the whole community But
for himself be had constitutional duty to per-
form. He believed every man should decide
the question for himself whether the proposed
amendment is necessary, and vote according to
his convictions. All outside questions and
considerations should be laid aside. He had q
record on this matter of amending the consti-
tuition. When here last, the Democratic party,
aided 6y Hon; f. A. Pike, attempted to SUBJ
init to the people proposition to amend the
constitution and insert certain penalties and
provisions in reference to bribery at elections
He then took the ground. seconded by Mr.
Wheelwright in the Senate, and the republi-
can party stood by him, that it was violation
OF the fundamental design OF the constitution
to incorporate into it part of the criminal
code. He had not changed his mind upon that
point. He could see no reason for the amend
ment. He did not believe that it would take
the question OF prohibition out of politics, or
that it would in any way tend to the suppress
ION OF the use OF Intoxicating liquors. As
friend to prohibition, and as one who knew the
evils OF intemperance. he warned those who
we're pressing it that they were taking a great
risk. He believed that it should not be done
until members were thoroughly convinced of
the necessity. No party whip or threat of re-
tirement would deter him from voting as he
conscientiously believed right. We have a
trust committed to us to transmit this consti-
tutional form of government, which we re-
celVeu from tne FOUNDERS OF the State to pos
terity. Constitutions were intended to define
the framework of republic, to show where
the sovereign power could be found, and to
furnish guide to the legislator and protection
to the citizeu, and a move like this proposal is
so great an innovation that we should hesitate
and have convincing reasons before adopting
it. He had heard no reason adduced, and un-
til some one was presented he should be un-
faithful.to his oath to support the constitution,
not to Vote against it. The trainers OF the con-
stitution wisely provided that it should not be
amended upon popular clsmor, or by petition,
but that two thirds of both branches of the leg
islsture should propose amendments when
they deemed them necessary This duty we
cannot evade, and while we may regard a
plank in party platform as advisory, il is no
valid reason for not exercising our best judg-
ment and acting upon our own convictions.
These and other considerations have determ-
ined me to cast my vote against it.