Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-04-12
rnn1In1rlnN rs. REnrLArIoN.

rRDIffElTIbS vs.. REiJl4AIlVN' "
We uo'o that our friends, the rroN billion =,
lists OF Texas ARE urminc themselves ior inc W
fray again. We have puhllshed their eau for e
n stnte con veution, TO be held at Paris, La r.,
mar county, on the historic anniversary OF ~
SON Tscinto. out OF several objects specified a.
rs motives for thr gathering, tho following a
S' W tsite siepS TO secure tho snbmlsrinn b
by the next legislature OF c'n'htnuonhl b
amendment 10 vote OF Tue people 10 PRO "
ture aud ale of Intoxicating liquors In Inc
J 10 p,ovIde means 20 secure the amend I
ment ana more efficient enforcement OF the 4
eXistiug local option law.
rms r.eans that We are tn have in Texas y
this var n who esslc aud excited agitation OF
the prob billion question, such az ms bech
witnessed in Ohio, Iowa and other states, we
are constratned To indulge ~ regret rather
Than otherwise. II IL 70 lie regretted on many :
accounts, Prohibition Is IN no wise pon liai
cal Questlon. II is one OF moral and social
economy, involving the consideration OF {
sumptuery primer -,
in the first place, on behalf of the
| temperance people OF the state, we de-
| sire to return thanks to the GAZETTE
for its courtesy in publishing the call
/ for the convention. Some of the other
pspers have not been so liberal.
Next, | desire To correct an errone-
nous impression into which you seem
to be drifting. 1t is not contemplated
that the con vention will take different
two We = rs ago. That convention by
resolution disclaimed any intention
of organizing distinct political party |
in the state. The position then and |
there taken was to require candidates |
. for the legislature, of all parties, to
, commit Themselves in favor Of sub.
hitting constitutional amendment |
. to vote Of the people before giving
n them the support OF the friends of
q prohibition.
You will remember that in the cleo
ton for members of the legislature in
1882, this was leading issue, and no
great excitement then prevailed, AS
II you now seem to apprehend. The re-
1t cult of the election was highly favora-
= BILE to the friends of temperance, and
when the legislature assembled ut its
e. regular session clear two-thirds ma
III iority of both houses was found
IL pledged to the submission of II consti-
tutional amendment upon the liquor
~ traffic to vote of the people.
We Such resolution passed the senate
a by u large majority, but was finally
~ defeated In the house by u number @!
~. members violating the pledges made
~ to their constituents, What secret
W. influence caused those men
will TO betray the people, know not
he 70 guard against the recurrence o
-. such treachery will be one of the ob
~ jects OF the convention.
De Again, Mr. Editor, you say tina
red "prohibition is in no wise politica
the question: You never were wors
~ mistaken. You certainly have no
~" maturely considered this question
eets What are political questions, If the
are not such rs affect the body polite
And what evil is affecting society an
the politics of the state more imper
hill ously than the liquor traffic? IL col
,,,t rupts the bailOt-box and public off
'"n' eials, and Is conceded to produce frol
EAST, three-quarters to nine-tenths of til
3 in crime and pauperiam which curse 81
ding oiety, necessitating expensive crimini
,., courts and prisons and coDsequer
Pie high taxation. Is 1t desirable to redut
ced, taxation? Then abolish the liqul
It Of traffic, the chief source of crime, erin
,uch inal courts, penitentlaries and 9th
ali heavy expenses.
49, You talk about revenue! For eve
lbol- dollar of revenue The state colleC
n, 1t from the liquor traffic, 1t pays out L
ne,a in suppressing the crime and supper
,,,aa ing the paupers occasioned by ga
s"ou traffic.
rsest The liquor sellers of New Englan
pos thirty years ago, thought that this W
n the , .ne p oliliSyai Question, ana INSIST
ne"s. their legal and constitutional rights
assed American citizens. They employ
cates Daniel Webster, a great constitution
SOM. lawyer, to have the question tested
the courts, and he carried IL to I
one supreme court of the United Stat
Great But that au ,ust tribunal thong
strate differently.
resen Chief Justice Taney in the celeb
ted license cases 70 Howard 50il sa,
.E,lf. "a.
tionhl ternal traffic in ardent spirits INF uric
IS the TO lis citizens, and calculated to 4
,nght duce likeness, vice or debanchery
see nothing in the constitution of
uiies' United States To prevent II from re-
IN in- lating or restraining the traffic.
sover- from prohibiting it altogether II
n and thinks proper.n
49,, Justice Catron said: II admit
. ioias inevitable that II the state has
eudal power OF restraint by license to 4
# the extent, she has the discretiun
thar. power to judge of its limit and n
49, So to the length of prohi siting 81
DISH altogether.n
aristo- The idea of high license seems to
ich, In to be the most untenable of all pl
main tons on this question. The llq
~ traffic Is either "A source of good
~ .ne evil. lfof good, IT ought not to
bill in restrained Mt all. Certainly the p
be no should not be debarred by high
mani cense, and the rich permitted TO M
..s opnlize the business.
seanus But II IL Ia an evil, as all admit .
SO the the power exists In the state to abol
"no.n Il, as the highest judicial tribunal
Id the the nation has decided, then 1t on
untry, In conclusion. Mr. Edi,o r"s sa,, !" -,
issue. permit me TO express astoHishn'
hers of That so able ajournal as the GAzE
I = rnI - u. a. -. /.
ow the snoo, "sa ,sIsr 70 pfoniultory liquor \
gland, word s,.mntuaTy K froni, Tia r,
II Is sumptus, and means ex penses. Su,
! DEM !nary laws We're intended to restI
repre-. h m~, ssYa;rs =, she c'.izan
WIN food, furniture, etc. They are a {