The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-09-03

EDIToR CLARION: When any gentle
man undertakes TO discuss the greatest
Of all the great living questions Of social
reform, he ought, at least, to approach
{ the discussion in a spirit Of frankness
and after a thoughtful, painstaking in.
vestigation If to ignorance Of facts
he add the spirit Of domination and
persecution which he denounces, his
phiiippics will be treated with the
same indifference or contempt which
he proposes to indulge as to the pro
hibiti0nists. That Fabius Is totally un-
Informed upon the question he endeay-
ors to ventiiate Is apparent to the least
intelligent reader of your paper. We
propose to set him right, and If he
really wants to know what prohibition
means and how it is justified and de
Tended, we can easily crafty him.
We have nothing 10 do with the belief
or personal habits Of Fabius, nor do we
care a penny whether his opposition to
prohibition proceeds upon the idea that
it Is an auxiliary to Radicalism. The
assertion that Prohibition is to take the
place of Greenbaekism to defeat De
mOeracy could only fiad ia -5fTtihspface
in his distempered Imagination The
movement will go or call the same" ;
it is knocking at every mans door de-
manding support; and Fabius may live
to see the day when he will be one of its
most earnest adherents. We challenge
him to investigate the subject, and will
be greatly surprised if he is not con-
verted. With his personal habits pro-
hibition has nothing to do.
What is prohibition. What docs it
propose? Fabius thinks /; proposes to
deprive "99 good men of a privilege, a
comfort, because the hundreth man
abuses the privilege" This he says is
unjust and comes in conflict with all
good government in all enlightened
ages Now the writer knew, or ought
to have known, that this is not so. Sump-
tuary legislation is contrary to the genius
Of republican institutions; but there is
4 wide difference between this sort of
legislation and prohibition. What the
personal wishes of total abstainers may
be, has nothing to do with the legal pro-
hibition of the liquor tafic. Prohibi-
ton, as we understand it, means the
breaking down of the open saloon sys-
tenn prevalent throughout the State and
relegating alcoholic stimulants to the
shelves of the druggist for sale as other
medicines or poisons. This may be, in
the mind of the man who likes his
"tOddy," indication of spirit of fan
aticism advocated by few fanatical
preachers" but the very intelligent mil
lions of laymen who advocate prohibi-
ton think themselves quite the equal of
Fabius in ascertaining what is right and
Just, and what is expedient. They do
not propose to be alarmed by any bla-
tant assertions as to the improperly of
their course. They rather think that
the foundations of ciUI liberty regula-
ted by law, and the inalienable rights
of man, will be sapped and destroyed
by the liquor traffic than by the effort
to suppress it. Will Fabius kindly in
form us in what the ''inalienable rights"
of the several members of political
community consist. He ought not to
get into such deep water.
Now prohibition proceeds upon the
idea that the people are capable of self
government and ought to govern; and
by people we mean a majority of the
people in each political subdivision of
the State. Prohibitionists in this State
have never asked anything but local
option law looking to this end, and they
will never rest until they secure it. They
will then 20 before the people and ask
the people to say whether the liquor traf-
fic shall be continued or not,-not as a
party measure, but as pure matter Of
police. We do not and cannot follow
Fabiusi in his allusions to God and Christ
we recoil from the fippant "Ingersolian"
stateneuts,-and allow him to tread the
path he has marked out alone Had he
said he opposed prohibition because it
was not the proper remedy for the
drunkenness, and misery, the poverty
and debauchery, and idiocy, and rapine
and murder, growing out of the liquor
| traffic, and suggested a better way, we
should have lifted our hats to him, and
patiently listened to his words of wis
dom. If the people choose his way we
cannot complain; but it is precisely be-
cause we want the people to settle it that
! Fabius complains. Certainly he ought to
/ have known that the wine of the ancients
was quite unlike the villainous com.
pounds of to-day, and that whisky and
brandy, and rum and gin are recent dis
coveries of the devil"
If Fabius really means what he says
and desires to enlighten US, or be en-.
lightened himself, we will be glad to
engage in temperate" discussion of the
question in all its bearings. Our statute
section 1887 of the Code, prohibits the
sale of liquors,-prohibition is the rule
licenss the exception. If there be il
all this broad land single apologist fol
the traffic who wants to see it unfettereC
for the benefit of "99 good men," lie
him publish his name, for him ''hav,
we offended" \.