Union County courier. [volume] (Elk Point, Union County, D.T. [S.D.]) 187?-1913, 1883-09-19

carried OF its feet. II am neither q
drnnkari nor rum-seller." he said.
''But you're democrat" remarked u
delegate.
.YOn're right, and l always expect
to be-" retorted Mr.. Wood.
A. b. Melville of Beadle--I would
rather do the right amid the frowns of
the world than do the wrong and re.
ceive all your bouquets and smiles.
When came here thought might
vote for submitting the issue, but since
| see It will split us, and that it will be
breaking faith with the democrats to
do SO. would not submit it. We are
here to adopt a state constitution, with
out any new issues or doctrines, and
when that is accomplished to present
IL to the people. | am sorry that the
temperance people should force this is
sue now. They say it is fair. 1t Is not.
We were not sent here to consider the
temperance question and it is not fair
for us to break faith with our constitu-
ency to do SO. hope no one, for the
mere sake of pandering to public clam
or to present the issue, will support this
measure. We should avoid every issue
upon which We are liable to split.
AlOnZO Converse of SanbOrn--I defy
anyone to say have sprung party poll
tics, or to say whether l am a democrat
or republican. / have not implied, rs
l have been charged with, that the re-
publican was party OF prohibition.
There can be no line drawn between
political parties on the prohibition
question. | favor the submission of
the question. because it will bring out
full vote.
A. 5. Jones of Hutchinson said he
had been accused of representing his
constituency as being ignorant. The
accusation was an insult He repre-
scented an intelligent community. but
they did not want to vote upon prohi-
bition with the constitution. 1t was
an entirely separate measure, and he
was against any measure that made the
constitution secondary. When the
proper time comes he would favor SUBJ
hitting the issue, but twas not now.
X. +. Pettigrew of Minnehaha--I
have heard "A great deal said about "a
compact. I've heard of no compact,
act, and ii there is a compact | repudi-
gained away ut Huron. Yankton or
prohibitionists here asked as little as
the issue, although ] oppose it. because
it means free whisky. Let the people
have voice, however, to express their
opinion. 1t is not question of wheth.
er or not this constitution will be rati.
fed. 1t can be submitted entirely sep
arate and alone. We dare not deay the
the people IA right to speak upon this
subject and express themselves fully.
NJ. Grigsby Of Minnehaha This is
not question of the merits of prohibi-
ton. 1t is q question of policy of sub
hitting the issue as collateral to the
constitution. don't belong to either
side. II l WAS u liquor man would
organize fight against the issue that
would not stop at the polls. but would
60 to congress. The anti-prOhibitiOn-
lists are united and they will fight it in
congress, and how could we meet such
la fight How would "A republican peo-
pie with prohibition fare with a demo-
cratic congress? We would be defeat
ed. Money and whisky are both used
freely in congress. We want a cOnsti-
tuition that will not only be ratified by
the people Of Dakota, but recognized
by congress also. and If l was prohi-
bitionist would not favor submitting
the Issue with the constitution. The
prohibition issue is u fight between the
liquor men and temperance people. and
has no place in the issue for statehood.
1t is a scheme to defeat admission to
statehood. Bouquets
Eli johnson OF Hyde-If there was a
compact that conflicts with submitting
this question it was wrong. and it IS
right to break a wrong compact.
Robert Dollard of Bon IIomme-I am
in favor Of giving the people consti-
tutional clause on prohibition, and am
willing to let them vote upon the
question of prohibition, but not with
the constitution rs it is now There
was u solemn compact entered into by
the Huron convention against having
to do with temperance now. Why
didn't these peopld raise the issue be-
fore this time. 1t looks to he as
though we had been holding out false
lights to attract the people if we vet ON
this matter now. The prohibitory peo-
pie have nothing to lose; those wanting
statehood have everything at stake.
&C. Moody of Lawrence have
hClN SllCllCC lOi TIC pun pOSc III 1clLlK
instructed. l usually come to con-
clusion without difficulty. but this is
the most difficult question I've had to
deal with so far in the convention.
The people are expected to have Opin-
ions and to act upon them, but this is a
new question. The liquor traffic is a
peculiar one, and it is he Id by many
that it is proper to absolutely prohibit
it. have thought that the question
should go before the people before he.
ing dealt with in organic law. If was
here preparing constitution for a
state already admitted to the union.
would not hesitate to cast my vote to
submit prohibition to the people. But
We are acting outside Of law. No act
of law has authorized these proceed
ings, and we must act that our work
does not end as idle winds. | ask my
temperance friends, what there is to
prevent ballOt-bOx stutfing by the
liquor element. Nothing. The ques.
ton will be defeated, and your temper
ance cause will receive blow
you will not recover from
for years. care not for liquor power
1t is not my friend. But wait, / ask,
until we have a state before You push
your issue. That is the only way by
which you can reap any benefit from
this convention. 1t will be the merest
expression OF opinion to submit the