The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-04-25
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.


The Liquor Question and Political Parties.
To the Editor of the indianapolis Journal
The temperance question is not political
question. but the liquor question is one Of politi
cal economy. How political party asking
to be intrusted with State affairs consistently
avoid noticing a matter to which is
traced the causes of the largest share
of the needless burdens of taxation,
more than three-quarters of the prevalent crime,
as well as social Generalization! Will the an
swer that ''lefeat is inevitable when we inter-
fere in that matter" dol OF course there are
other important questions involved in the com
ing election, but they are chiefly of national
character There is none of equal import of
State character to that of the liquor question,
and the questions relating to each, Of right,
should be treated upon their respective merits
by parties and by voters.
1t has been agreed by nearly ali Republicans
that the party did right in the last campaign, in
demanding that the people should be permitted
to vote upon the liquor amendment then pend
ing; that, as by petition they had asked the
passage and submission Of such an amendment
to the popular vote, and that the right of petit
ton was sacred. ana SnOulu De De6Ue0 NOW II
it was right then. and commanded the party 5
Endorsement in 1882. would it be less so in 1881
The force of this view of the matter IS more
palpable when it is remembered that the DEM
ocratic Legislature of 1883 denied the right OF
the people to vote on this question. 1t Is true
that there was pretext for it, but that was all.
That sting remains. 1t cannot be cured except
by going forward in good faith and granting
what was and is still asked. The fact is, that
there is as deep feeling on this question as
ever prevailed during the most intense period
of the anti-savery contest The true philosophy
Of party direction is to meet facts as they are
presented.
Did the Republican party ever meet in State
convention and ignore a question which affects
the States general interests more than any 9th
er, and about which there was more intense in
serest and feeling than all othersl If any one
thinks so, let them look up the party platforms
of the past, and read the history of the times
when they were made. It will not be denied
chat 8 large majority of Republican voters in
Indiana fully recognize the enormity Of the
liquor traffic and drink problem, and have con-
Fictions that something further ought to be
done to repress and eradicate the evils in order
that the public burdens they occasion might be
lightened and removed in measure at least.
Now, having such convictions, would it not be a
scandal, if not an insult to the intelligence of
the people of the State, to meet i'll convention
to consider State polity, and refuse to make
any expression the subject! For one,
have better opinion of the Republicans of
course of the coming June State convention. l
can understand why Republicans in counties
where there is a strong liquor element in the
party. and whose chief interest is party success
should hesitate in the shadow of such in
fuence. But on the other hand, with the in
telhgent masses of the party success at the cleo
ton is nothing if it does not involve reasonable
assurance of better social and political conditions
reform when all feel its greatest need, as in
this liquor question 1t is admitted by most
who have considered the matter, that any eX-
preston on the subject must be in favor of the
elimination of the abuses and burdens growing
out of the traffic. Nothing short of this
if anything is done, would be decent.
Then, in view of the leagued opposition
of the liquor traffic to all measures
of reform. high license in Ohio, Illinois and else
where, is it not apparent that any expression on
the subject will lose the party the liquor vote-I
mean that part of it which has personal inter
ests involved and such as that can influenced!
If this is true. the only way to strengthen the
party is to make that expression on. the subject
measure as near up to the general demand as
possible. The remaining consideration is, what
Is the mean of that demand! Here, it would
seem, Is the only point where there can be amy
reasonable variance of opinion. I know of no
class of voters III Indiana asking for high-l-
eense law. In the past few years discussion of
reform measures the eradication of the evil of
the traffic has been uppermost and public opin
ion has turned simply on favoring and opposing
that. No other distinctive policy has either
q been petitioned for or in any organized
way urged upon the State. In view of this, it
seems to me that the very least that the coming
State convention should do would be to
l. Recognize the evils, Generalization and
public burdens flowing from the liquor traffic.
2 Avow the fact that there are honest differ
ences of opinion among Republicans as to the
best methods Of reaching the evils.
g. Reaffirm the action of the Republican
State convention of 1882 as to the right of the
people to vote on the amendments then pending.
f. Condemn the action of the last Democratic
Legislature which interposed to deny the rightof
popular vote thereon.
g. Maintain that it is the duty of the General
Assembly, when large number of voters petition
therefor, in the future in the past, to either
pass an act providing for a constitutional con-
venton, or an amendment to be submitted to
the popular vote, looking to the total eradication
Of the liquor traffic for beverage purposes
There is abundant reason for believing that
such an expression of loyalty and Difference to the
rights of the majority would rally around the
party, making it a host that would sweep the
State. JNo B. CONNER.
INDIANAPOLIS, April 81.
The Republican Party and Prohibition.
To the Editor Of the Indianapolis Journal
In the Journal of April Il appeared letter
from a temperance Republican on the subject
Temperance and Politics. which the Journal in
dorsed, in an editorialSand asked its careful con