The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1885-10-09

Judge John H. Doyle was the Chairman
OF the meeting on the part Of the Rspub
licans. Representative Frank Hurd OF.
fciatad for the Democrats. The time oil
the speakers was divided as follows:
Governor Hoadly opened with one
hour; Judge Foraker then occupied one
hour and a hall, Hoadly to close with
half an hour.
Judge Doyle called the meetingto order.
Representative Hurd arose and intro
duced Governor Hoadly in few words,
and the latter began his speech amid the
enthusiastic plaudits Of the audience.
He began by reciting the circumstances
leading 10 the challenge to joint debate.
The most important issue OF the cam
paigu was the question OF personal liberty
and how far intsriered with by law as to
the habit OF drinking. He then proceed
ed to define the position OF both parties
on the liquor question by reading the
platforms Of each.
THE LIQUOR QUESTION.
He defined the plank in the Republi-
can platform recognizing the right of the
people to amend the organic law of the
State to mean that the Republicans favor
the prohibitory amendment. lie argued
that the point, however, was hos far the
law may go to regulate the personal hab'
its OF citizens. The answer to ii depended
on the answer to another question, "iA
drinking vice? Is il harmful or wIolg
to take one glass OF beer or wine? Is q
man to be allowed TO indulge in moderate
drinking, which can do no hatm2 II
drinking be a vice, selling liquor is vice.
But II man who is capable OF self.control,
who takes q drink on farm does no
harm, then it does no harm TO drink
lit in a saloon. He referred to the
local option feature otthe Scott!aw, which
differs from total prohibition as coach
dog differs from dog all one color. he
mathematical the Scott law for this
feature. He defined himself as opposed
to partial prohibition or total prohibition
and in favor of personal freedom TO the
fullest extent. The speaker elaborated
the point that il wrong in one plIce drink
ing was wrong in all ii right il Qua place
it was right in all. The principle that
would Justly the Scott law the local
option feature would justify the prohibi.
ton Of chewing or smoking tobacco within
lmunicipaIities. His conclusion was that
Legislation must be dir cted agatlst
evils of liquor drinking, but not against
drinking itself. This was in the right di-
rectiou Of temperance legislation within
cities or without them. The most valua-
BILE D )ssessiou Of citizen is his personal
liberty therefore, all movements which
strike at this must be opposed. Drinking
is not a vice, but excessive drinking Is.
Prohibition is failure in Maine, in ka1-
sa, aud in Iowa, The statistics Of nam
ber OF United States liquor licenses Is.
sued in these States we're reat show
ing an increase in two OF these.
| PROHIBITION DENOUNCED. f
Hoadly pronounced prohibition an in
certivs to hypocrisy and said he was
against it root and branch. BE challenged
Foraker to state why he was in favor ol
local prohibition in municipalities and not
in favor Of prohibition in the whole State.
He is in favor OF the Sao.t Law, the ninth
section Of which gives municipalities the
power to prohibit. How can he Justify
this and not justify State prohibition? He
compared Foraker to the sandwich man
| with placard in front mot for prchbi-
ton" and on the back ptacard With mot
against prohibition" aud challenged
i him to state whether he was in
favor OF prohibition or opposed 70
In. He insisted that prohibition ID
the issue in Ohio becauge the next Legis'
ture will be asked to PISS prohibition
Legislation. Hedesired to knowif Foraker
was elected Governor whether he will In
his message recommend the submission ol
the prohibitory amendment to the State
Constitution. he demanded whether il
the Republican Supreme Court is elected
il will reverse the late decision that the
Scott law Is unconstitutional and compel
the saloou keepers to pay back the ta3es.
He charged that this waa the Republican
programme. He declared there were but
two methods OF settling the temperance
question: Prohibition and liCense. The
Scott law was but bastard kind OF q
license. He declared be favored graded
license measure according.ts-the amount
OF aales, license protects the traffic, secures
persoual liberty, crushes out low dives
and secures obedience to the law by
dealers. He declared that houses of i'll
fame would not be licensed to sell E9uoI
as under the Scott law:
The speaker quoted Senator Sherman as
saving the Legislature Of Ohio cannot
license the sale OF liquor and under the
present constitution could not see how the
tax Law could be passed that will haYe "a
be construed by court as license. He
declared taxation . revenue power, moi
police power, az the saott law made It
That law proved q future as police
measure because more United StatsI
licenses were issued the year Il vas in
force than in the previous year.
The speaker closed with a brief le2a
uySument 10 show that taxation Is really
license GAd unconstitutional.
JUDGE sosA6EE'G REPLY.
Tremendous cheering followed tht
speech when Judge Doyle introduced
Judge ForAkar, who, alter the applaus'
subsided, began by rrieHinS to seyera
minor parts Of aoadly' speech, He thsl
, said that from the Ghsraoterpt HOadly1
remarks he evidently IateHded the speecl
for Leonard, the Prohibition candidate to
.. Governor The Republican plank on thI
. IIiquor traffic is four explicit declarations
. First, denouucing the Democrats for thi
repeal Of the Scett law; second, recog
mixing the right Of the people to auent
J the Constitution; third and fourth
/ deClsring In hEor Of the regulation
/ and taxation Of the liqd1r traffic. H
. read from Hoaily's inaugural address
Q paragraph ia which the Governor sal!
= the Scott Law ought not to bs repealed
! Regarding the right ol tho people y
change the Constitution be showed tn
Q Democratic plea t)r license cannot b
. adopted without tEst amending the Con
: stitntion which torbids liGenEs. The Re
publican platform declares In favor {