The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-09-02

ly turn out that the President is to favor free
trade policy, we may only expect repetition OF
that continued decline and ultimate bankruptcy
which has overtaken us every time the country
has lapsed from the stimulus of protection to the
paralysis of free trade"
In concluding his speech, Judge Foraker took
up the liquor question, speaking as follows:
s'The Democrats have destroyed the Scott law,
and with it they have broken down all regula-
ton and restraint of the evils of the liquor
traffic, and have robbed the people of a just
source of revenue to the amount of s., 600, 900
annually. But it is said that law is unconstitu-
tional We have our respective opinions as to
whether it should ever have been so declared,
and we likewise have our respective opinions as
to the manner in which the decision was secured.
But suppose it was unconstitutional, for the
reason assigned by the court, it does not follow
that another like it would be if it omitted the
lien clause on which the court rested it's decis-
ion On the contrary, the court has held that 1t
of the Supreme Court of Ohio that while the
Scott law, according to the last decision,
was for the particular reason assigned,
unconstitutional, yet that it is constitu-
tional and entirely competent to tax the
liquor traffic and to regulate it so as to suppress
its evils. The court has never presumed to say
that it was unconstitutional to tax the traffic.
1t was the duty, therefore, of the last Legisla-
ture, if it wanted to serve the best interests of
the people of the State, to have promptly re-
enacted another law for the taxation of the
liquor traffic when the Scott law was abrogated
by the Supreme Court decision. But it failed to
do SO; it neglected its opportunity, and that OF
itself is another reason why the Democratic
party should be turned out and the Republican
party put in.
1.-THE people of Ohio want another such law as
the Scott law was. and they not only want it,
but they intend to have it, Not that we imagine
that such a law will be entirely satisfactory to
everybody, for we do not. On the contrary,
we know that some people will be satisfied with
nothing but license, others with nothing but
prohibition, while others want absolute free
trade, such as we are practically having now;
but because so long as we live under our present
Constitution-which we must do until the people
change tit is the only practicable and the most
nearly satisfactory measure we can have.
The Republican party is practical party. 1t
takes hold of the situation as it exists and makes
hence it is that the Republican party, recognizing
the situation as it is declares itself to be In favor
of the regulation and the taxation of the liquor
traffic. Our Democratic friends do not pretend
to say that the liquor traffic ought not to be
taxed On the contrary, they conceded that
right two years ago, and they concede that right
now. Their only objection is that they do not
want to tax it until they can amend the Consti-
tuition, and not only until they can amend the
Constitution, but until they can amend it in a
particular way, that is to say, in favor of grad
uated license system.
I'm view of the record that the people of Ohio
have made with respect to license, we are
warranted in saying that our Democratic friends
mean by their declaration that nothing whatever
shall be done with the liquor traffic License
was voted upon and defeated by the people when
our present Constitution adopted It was
voted on and defeated again by the people by an
overwhelming majority in 1874. 1t was third
time voted upon and defeated by the people in
1883.
But consider for moment how badly it was
defea at this last election. In order that it
should carry it was necessary that it should re-
ceive majority of all the votes cast at that
election. The total number of votes cast was
72l, $40: necessary for the adoption of license,
800 $50; number of votes cast in favor of license,
SO, 1885, the number of votes the proposition
lacked for adoption 261 412 In other words, the
naked majority against license was 500, 824 In
other words, again, Democratic friends
declare that they are in favor of regulating the
liquor traffic and taxing it only by one way, and
that way is e way which the people of Ohio have
voted upon and condemned by a majority of
more than 500, 900 votes. There never was
more impertinent and palpable case Of trifng
with the people of Ohio than the Democratic party
are attempting when they say they propose to
regulate and tax the traffic by license system
that is manifestly, in view of these figures, an
absolute impossibility.
1.-THE difference between the Democratic and
the Republican parties is simply this and it is the
same difference that has always existed between
these parties with respect to important pub
lie questions: The Republican party takes
hold of the situation as it is, and proposes to
deal with it in practical, sensible. manly, out
spoken, fearless manner, SO as to subserve and
promote the public welfare and the best interests
Of the people of the State. The Democratic
party proposes to ignore the practical situation,
and processes to have ideas that it knows are
impossible Of practical application. If it were
possible to have license, it could not be had
for two years yet to come. 1t is hardly probable,
if our Democratic friends should have the Legis
lature that they would have it by three fifths
vote. Until they get Legislature in which
they have three fifths majority and every
single one of them in favor Of license,
it will be impossible for them to
even submit the question to the people.
This Of itself is SO improbable that it
is hardly necessary to consider the further i'm
probability of the people ever adopting any such
measure. 1t is manifest, therefore, if the people
of Ohio would have this matter dealt with, they
must elect the Republican party to power
'We occasionally hear men talking about not
being satisfied with the Republican party. and
intending to turn their backs upon it, because it
does not come up to the full measure of all they
would have it do. Let such men remember that
they are part of the Republican party; the
party is not something other than themselves.
They have part and parcel in all its gories of the
past. If they are proud of that past; let them
stand by their party, that has been the salvation
of the country.in the days gone by, and is the
1t has been a great power and instrument for
good in the land. 1t has never failed to accom-
plish it's high mission. In the party, therefore,
is the place for all who esteem themselves Re
publicans to remain. Stay within its lines,
follow its flag and help it to work out the glo
rious destiny of the American people,"