The Monitor., 1884-06-06
Subscription, One Dollar per Year.

perance men from leaving the old parties by
abuse and ridicule, they and their party Lead
ers will most assuredly be mistaken The
treatment that temperance men are receiving
from partisan organs is calculated to drive
them away from the old parties, but as it
seems that this movement is among the
things that are inevitable, it might as well
come first as last. Liquor dealers make their
demands upon the old parties, and if their de-
mands are not complied with there is bolt
and, strange to say, the temperance people
are charged with defeating the party by hav-
ing asked the party to do what the liquor
dealers were opposed to. Liquor dealers are
never censured for bolting although temper
ance people are criticised for doing anything
that may be offensive to the lords of the still
If the old parties believe that the liquor
traffic is a public good. we shall not abuse
them for that belief, but we shall try to con-
vince them that they are wrong, and we shall
ask them to meet the issue squarely.
To say that prohibition is impracticable
and therefore wrong, is absurd. The plain
traffic an evil ? If it is an evil the next ques-
ton is, How shall this evil be extirpated?
The men who say that prohibition is imprac-
ticable propose to destroy the liquor traffic by
recognizing it as good thing, and giving it "a
legal status that it is in no way entitled to-
They propose to stop stealing by licensing
thieves, and thus giving thieves standing of
legal honesty. Either the liquor traffic is
public good or public curse. If it is pub
tic good, take off all restrictions. If it is
public curse, prohibit it. Prohibition is now
great political issue that cannot be ignored.
The question must be met The day has
passed when political party can legislate in
favor of liquor men and yet retain the votes
of temperance mer. On all political ques-
tons citizens have right to differ, and this
right is acknowledged with regard to every
question, save that which involves the liquor
traffic Thoughtful men are convinced that
liquor dealers control the old parties, and
nothing will change their convictions until
one of the parties shall insert prohibition
plank in its platform. And when it is under
stood that this plank simply means that the
people shall have an opportunity to be heard
on the question of manufacturing and selling
intoxicating liquor, it must be acknowledged
that temperance men are very moderate in
their exactions. Twenty-Five years ago
Judge of the supreme court held that slave
had no rights that a white man was bound to
respect, and now it seems, according to the
views of some people, that temperance men
have no rights that politicians are bound to
respect.
We have respectfully asked our legislature
from year to year to pass law that would
give all citizens an opportunity to express
their convictions on the continuance of the
liquor traffic. For reasons that it is unneces-
sary to state our requests have been disre-
garded.
1t is either right or wrong to sell intoxicat-
ing liquor as a beverage. If it is right then
all restrictions should be removed. If it is
wrong then it should be prohibited.
Again, it is either politically right or wrong
for the people to have an opportunity to be
heard on question that involves the politi-
cal, moral, social and financial rights of all the
people in the state. If it is politically wrong
for the people to be heard let some one be
bold enough to say so, and some Patrick
Henry will rise up to yindicate the cause of
disfranchised freemen. If, as we claim, the
people have an inalienable right to be heard
no one can Justly complain if the people bolt
from party that will not recognize their
sacred rights. We claim that the people of
New Jersey have never had the opportunity
of voting squarely on the prohibition of the
liquor traffic. Some years ago We asked for
local option, and it was refused. Members of
the Legislature said, if we do anything let us
enact prohibitory law. Now that we ask
for constitutional prohibition members Of the
legislature and others say, 1T is wrong to
ask for constitutional prohibition either ask
for statutory prohibition or local option" So
that it seems we are always asking for the
wrong thing and therefore get nothing.
Daniel Webster was very fond both of ang-
ling and hunting. He could dexterously cast
the fly and was good shot. On his farm OF
one occasion he had visitor who was fond of
hunting, but could seldom kill on the wing.
Webster had an excellent setter dog, and
while accompanying the visitor partridge
shooting the dog soon found covey of birds.
and Webster told his friend to step forward
and shoot He did SO, but killed nothing.