The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-01-16
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.

The Future of the Temperance Reform.
10 the Editor of the indianapolis Jou rnal:
& There are some very wise things in Brother
REYNOLDS late paper in the Journal, ON the fu-
ture of the temperance reform, and some quite
otherwise. It wise to suggest that no good
can come to US, as Republicans, from our vicious
abuse of St. John. He may not be a saint, his
domestic life may not have been unobjectionable
and his course as a candidate mar not have been
just the proper one but none of these things affect
the question of prohibition nor in the least dis
hearten the 100. 900 who voted for him, but on
the contrary this resort to personal abuse of a
candidate let's us down to the level of those
Democrats and mugwumps who bespattered
General Garfield and Mr.. Blaine with vile
ISLANDERS. 1t is q low species of politi-
cal warfare utterly unworthy the Re
publican party. No one dares to say
that one of thousand. if one in ten thousand,
of those who voted for him. ever suspected per-
sonal or political foulness in st. John. Besides
they did not vote for st. John; they voted for
their principles, and they entertain those prn-
ciples yet and we are much more likely to add
to their number than diminish it by this abuse,
which we ought not to do
But it is not wise to ask the Republicans in
this Legislature to propose a constitutional con-
ventop There ought TO be convention. There
are hundred reasons for one, but prohibition is
not in the number. 1t was d great mistake to
put it in the platform last summer, and proclaim
that it in the interest of prohibition. 1t cost
us more than the adoption of the Cum back resolu-
ton could have cost US, for it effeetuay drove
off the liquor element that would, and the
want of that resolution drove off 5000 Prohibi-
tionists, not to count the accessions that
might have been made from the Greenback
party, all Of whom Prohibitionists and we
might have got here and there Democrat; for
there are many ad interim Democratic Prohibit
tionists who might stick to their Prohibition
at an election, if invited them by positive
policy. Let there be no constitutional conven
ton proposition as Republican measure this
session. More tnan half of the Democratic
members of the present Legislature believe that
there ought to be revision Of the Constitution.
Let that party be responsible for the damage
and inconvenience constantly growing out of our
present defective Constitution To propose it as
a Republican measure is to defeat it; to vote for
it on it's merits is to adopt it. Let the Democrats
propose it, and let Republicans vote for or
against it, as their individual convi:
tions dictate, and not otherwise 1t is
in no sense party question, and least of all
should it be complicated with the temperance
question; for of all humbugs in modern politics
this prohibition in the Constitution humbag is
the chief. 1t is even worse than the God-inthe
Constitution humbug which was rampant de-
cade or so ago. speak this as Prohlbitonist
IN whom has been no variabieness or shadow of
turning for more than thirty years, though not
yetof that type which demands the utter destruc-
ton of the traffic, though l confess strong
leaning toward it of late, seeing the arrogance
and INSTRUMENTATION of the traffic and its de-
termination to disregard and override all re-
stgietive legislation, and to- defeat all men and
all measures that arenot in it's interest. We need
we contemplate a law after the
model of the law of Maine, which no
Indiana Prohioitionist thinks Of There is no
prohibition in the Iowa Constitution. yet there
is as effective law in Iowa as the Kansas law.
as satisfactory to the temperance men, and as
much hated by the liquor interest, with i'm
mepSe reseryal power to intensity it If need be-
The people of Iowa adopted prohibtory clause,
/ because that was the rage or craze of six years
ago but the Supreme Court set it aside, where
upon they went to work and simply amended
the old law until it is called a prohibtory law,
which it is not in any proper sense. Our present
Indiana law is prohibitory except under certain
conditions All that we need is to amend our
| present law to make it entirely satisfactory to
ninety nine in every hundred Prohibitionists lso
called) in the State, The Supreme Court sus-
tanned every material feature of the Baxter law,
and while do not regard local option as the
proper thing, yet that law might be so amended
as to embrace no untried or unapprovea princi-
pie, and yet diminish the evils of tipping houses
almost to their minimum. Now if the Repub-
leans in the Legislature want to do anything in
TINS line, let them amend our present law Ia Few
particulars by al entirely new law. yet conso-
nant with the present Constitutions But don't
attempt even that unless we have made up eur
minds to stand by the law, sink or swim. after
it is enacted. The marriage Of the Democracy
with the liquor interest is Of long standing, and
their relations have been too harmonious to
| justify our toying with their Della We can
not divorce these eOngenial companions if
we try, but we can drive from
MS the thousands who have con
vicfions on the temperance question by our