National Republican., 1886-09-08
p,scuss,,r Proh,h,,,or.

EDITOR NATIONAL REPUBLICAN In your
issue Of Saturday you challenge discus
sion Of prohibition. A great Journal can
not pursue wiser policy for It's readers
than TO publish expression of the best
thought Of the country, If It can excite IL,
on topics Of deep public concern. Whether
you can accomplish this in this case the
future will reveal. There has been up
to this time no argument, "a dlstin-
guished from emotional rant, submitted
to the public to Justify the state in CON
trolling what people shall drink. There
has been much incoherent fury displayed
in public places over the subject OF coercive
temperance legislation, and many ordinarily
sedate persons, and some journals accred-
tied with fair amount OF mental ballast,
have lost their heads and fallen
into paroxsyms over this subject,
but the stage Of argument has not
yet been reached. This world can always be
relied upon to produce plentiful crop OF
fanatics. The commotion occasloned by
these people is, and always will be, dspro-
portionable to the wisdom Of their theories
aud so.called proposed reforms. Prohibit
ton has Its spring and beginning in fanatl-
cism. Our race began the undertaking of
government with theocracy. From the.
ocracy they dropped to the doctrine OF the
divinity Of kings. This last theory perished
on this continent and was ssupplanted by con-
freedom was the divinity. Prohibitlonsts
propose to substitute for the divinity Of the
constitution the divinity OF majority Of
voters; whatever is desired by majority
that shall be done. The Judgment OF q
majority shall be the highest criterion of
right and wrong, in all matters govern.
mental and ethical I'm this country. The
new political dogma, say the Prohlbltionlsts,
Is to be the assumption OF the divinity Of
the majority. This dogma is entirely new.
No people, no government has ever yet
tolerated II.
Constitutional government is denial of
the soundness OF the dogma. IL is n de-
NAL Of the infalllbility OF the majority. 1t
Is protest against the divinity OF the
majority. Constitutions are limitations
upon the power OF n majority. A majority
IN this country cannot lay its hand upon
any fundamental right OF the individual
The freedom OF the press, free speech, free
dom Of conscience, OF religion, Of opin-
ion, OF titles TO property, of life, and
personal security are preserved against
attack by q majority. The logic Of consti-
tutional government is distrust Of the ma
iorlty. It shelters, in general way, all
alton by the majority. II is said that when
ever n respectable number of voters desire
to change the constitution their issue, what
ever IL be, should thereupon be submitted
to vote Of the people. This is purs and
transparent nonsense. II arespectable mum.
Der believed that church and state should
be reunited, the proposition to reunite
must, In obedience TO this doctrine, be sub.
mitted. Freedom Of speech, freedom of
the press, security to life, liberty, and
property, canonized In the constitution, aud
secured, after centuries Of struggle, from
the fury OF majority rule, must be again
handed over TO the same dangers which the
race have so arduously toiled to be rid OF.
1fa respectable number (whatever that un.
defined number may be) desire to submit q
proposition for king or for anarchy, It
must be digniied by the whole people
by submitting II TO n vote. Our civilization
is against kings, against anarchy, against
bringing religion into politics, against sub
mitting ethical matters, and the govern
ment Of the family to the dominion Of the
legislature. Our civilization will not per-
nit the government to extend its jurisdc-
tion to the control Of personal conduct aud
department, where such conduct and de-
pertinent is not an invasion Of the security
Of others. CIVILIZATION.