New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-05-29
THE SCOTT LIQUOR LAW.
ITS RELATION TO THE OHIO CAMPAIGN


lTRoM OCCASIONAL CORRESPONDENT OF THE rRrnuNE'I
CLEVELAND, May 25.-No ono was more active III
securing the passage last winter of the Scott Liquor
BILL which is shortly to engage the attention OF the
Supreme Court. and later to be the basis of the most
important issue between the two political parties,
than o. j. Hodge, Speaker of the State Assembly
He helped draft the bill, was consulted ut every
stage of its progress lent the weight of his office to
the removal of parliamentary Obstructons ana cast
the vote that lifted it to the plane of a statute His
motive was not alone partisan, for regardless OF
parties, public sentiment for at least year Dack
had been demanding some sort of legislative acuon
that should quiet the dispute between temperance
advocates and the extreme "libcralists" over the
regulation Of the liquor traffic. Both sides
IN their way were fanatical the one aiming
at absolute prohibition, the other at free
trade The perverted construction put upon tho
clause in the Constitution forbidding license, by
which liquor selling became common without IL
ccnsc. had reused the ProhIbitiOniss TO a deter
mInation that the statutes should carry explicit
provision stopping the traffic; while the liquor IN
terests embodencd by the failure of restrictive
laws, were clamorOus against anything designed 10
make legal distinction between steel aud alcohol.
As between the two parties, on general questions,
the mass OF temperance voters had always sided
with the Republicans. They became strong el'-
mcnt i'm party conferences aud alc1latlOns. A year
ago they led the party into the passage OF the Pond
law The party was wrecked by It. That dld not
disturb or modify their plans, however, tor TINS
year On the contrary their representatives. IN the
Legislature insisted upon repeating the expert
mcnt. confident of better results as the people
should come to understand the intent, bearing and
effect of what was proposed. Last years election
convinced the Republican leaders that they had
/ l., IL in, al
cause OF a faction. Had the Pond law stood upon
firm constitutional basis. the Republicans might
have been justified even after defeat, in yielding to
the demands of their allies for another experiment.
I;ut the laws defeat not alone
structural. II failed to enlist party
enthusiasm. and some quarters party
support was withheld. The campaign on the
Republican side timd and cvasiye. supreme
Court decision striking squarcly in the face OF party
! policy dlsheartencd every one, and speakers went
forth to plead rather than to ht to excuse ana not
assail This from side that hal ever been aegres-
/ sIyc and bold with plain opinions to he PLAINLY
! stated and q cause both sincere and stron- throw
first suspicion and then distrust upon the canvass
/ Meanwhile there was complete turnabout IN the
tactics If the Democrats. Their speakers had moth
ingto defend. Popular interest had centred npoh thlS
single issue. Everything tondcd to give Democrats
J
low il up and the sort Of popular respect inspired
by dash and frlnkuess ana persistent and conciu-
siyecYposuro Of the blunders of their opponents
went ON, 10 them. The result of the November
elections was largely duo to the con-
d.tion Of public feeling induced by the
causes thn, cmanatiug from tic tw" parties.
| The election made il clear that the Republicans
would need to assert Themselves again upon the
/ nquor quc.tou through legislative enactment
/ silence would invite further punishment, besides
layinc the party open to the just charge OF moral
cowarl;ce. The question naturally suggested to
tbc lawmakers was 10 what extent the party could
| safely l., committed upon the liquor issue. There
seemed no doubt tha Republican sentiment leaned
towards. restraining the evils of intenpcrancr, but
fully as certain II that party interests would
suffer from any attempt to OyerSep legal or consu-
tu,ional hounds ProhibitIonsts were stIil rampant
for their hobby Arguments to demonstrate the
folly Of but ing against the Constitution failed to
tun them. From the lofty ground Of moral prn-
c,ple they .ncercd al cxpcdicncy. Nothing but the
moon was to satisfy them. Their deaf resistance
FASTENED the necessity for strong handed direction
! OF the party cause.
THE TEMPERANCE MEN AND THE LAW.
Tho result was the preparation OF the Scott bill
obno1 ions alike At first to the Temperance wing and
the Democrats but framed with the view OF
nossing the ordeal of test before Tho
Supreme Court and of restraining tho extent %
the lauor traffic. Speaker Hodge was very nuci
interested in tho passage of bill that would com
pass these ends. He spoke freely to-day OF ha'
had been done and ths hopcd-ior results AiteI
explaining as above with regard to the radca
stand taken by the temperance men whcn the Leg
islature met he said I'VE could only expect from
what they had said, that they would oppose the
bill They were always critIclsIng 1t because Il
didn't prohibit anything. Yet we hoped that o'
the time II was III shape for passage they wonl'
soc that il vas practicable and held out bette
prospects for their cause than anything that nae
heon suggested. They walted long time, how
over and when we reached IA part of the bill il
which il became necessary to offer an amendment
,,, sLonId rencol n section of an Old law forbid
ding the sale of liquor to be- drunk on the premises
thcv nrotested so strongly that thought The tlm
had come for plain talking on the floor SO salt
tina Marty had suffered enough from yielding
, fnnatIcal demands last year, and that temper
once psople ought to understand tina
. their representatives were blocking theII
own path by opposition to blll drawn not onIS
secure added revenues, but to restrain the tranc
which they were striking.
"Tbe old law of 1851 with the inhibition upo
selling liquor to be drunk on the premises hld I
begin with been imperative Tor years III inc ncA
pace. the preceding sections OF the Scott Dill ha
! in effect authorized the sale OF liquor to he druh
where bought The Scott law would nave peeh III
consistent in itself if 1t hadn't repealed 'hiS ou Ill
hbtion and since Incorporated III my aihch''hlen
to the Scott bill all the other important features
the old law it was sheer folly for the temperate
,oonlo tn resist this necessary elimination.
sunnose they had been vexcd with the virtua
rcpcal of the Sunday law passed last year. ina
renea was an element OF strength in the Scott bill
and 1t operated only to the extent OF leaving th
Sunday question in the control of municipal corpo
t rntions. That repeal was what reused Mr' Smlt
of Noble County. lie was the author OF the Sunda
law. and after tie repeal he declared am III
formed, that he would not give his vote to tue Sco
8 bill. Other prohibitionists made simiia
declarations bnt later on ana aiter III
remarks on the floor. to which | just referred n
! / LLLL