National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-09-20
Where Arc the G1.non 2

The Insignificant proportions Of the Pro-
hibition, or third party, vote in Maine arc a
genuine surprise to most persons who are
not thoroughly acquainted with the poli-
ties, parties, and people OF that state. Two
years ago 1O,703 voters in the Pine Tree
State, after most exciting campaign, cast
their ballots in favor of putting prohibition d.
into their fundamental law. On the 18th
Of this month, after campaign OF almost
unexampled activity and interest, the pro-
hihtlon army, led by Neal Dow and John
p. st. John, mustered less than four thou
sand voters.
Why this tremendous falling or
Where are the $1,000 voters who were for
prohibition two years ago and do not APP
pear in the Dow.St. John phalanx Of today
The answer to the first question is that
prohibition was not an issue in the cam
paign-the issue presented by Dow and St.
John being, "Thc Republican party must
gO.n
To the second question, we answer that
most Of the 67,000 missing voters cast their
ballots for the Republican candidates on
the 18th instant, the balance voted the
Democratic ticket.
The Maine Republicans are, as rule,
prohibitonists, while the Maine Democrats
are, as a rule, anti-prohibltion, but there
are exceptions on both sides.
The Republican party In Maine believes
the third party TO be not only useless, but
fraud, having for It's chief purpose, not
the promotion OF temperance, but the
"smashing of the Republican organizes
tion.m
The st. Louis Globe. Democrat, referring
to the result in Maine and "the causes Of
the Prohibition failure" says that
All men possessing sufficient information OF
the subject to enable them to vote intelligeutly
in any canvass in which there is q prohibition
issue or prohibition party in the field know
that the Republican party, as a party, Is the
foe of the whisky power as an element In poll-
tics, and that the Democratic party, as party,
is its friend. They know that the Republican
party adopted prohibition in Maine Kansas.
Massachusetts, Iowa, Rhode Island, and other
states, against the protests and opposition of
the Democracy.
Among other "causes OF failure" the
GlOJe-Democrat cites the fact that promI-
nent Prohibition journalist showed during
the gubernatorial campaign in Ohio in
| 1885 that most Of the campaign expenses
Of the Prohibition party in 1884 were paid
out Of the Democratic national campaign
fund; also that Neal Dow, whose testimony
on this particular point can not be i'm
| peached, declared to a reporter few days
| ago that John p. st. John refused to speak
in Augusta and Bangor because the people
OF those cities either could not or would not
pay him the Zee which he demanded. Be-
fore the recent canvass began Neal Dow
SAID;
There is not word of truth in the assertion
that the Maine law is failure. On the con-
Lu!, H'' s.e'. SUCCESS ,lon sue Dv
sro,,ory ord bas roJrood ,ro ,,oI,,n,o -, ,,,o
IIonor tra,Ilc 10 about one-twentle,h of what n
was before. We save by It, directly and indl.
recily, at least s2i,OOO,OOO, which. without
prohibition, would be spent aud wasted in
dfinK'
When the recent canvass was under way
| Neal Dow said, and his associates repeated
II In hundred different ways:
| For many vears we have anoliel To Mnino
Republican legislatures for such additions Ia
tho law ne exner,ence has shown IA bc neces-
sorv hut ,vn nave heep ob,oIutelv ref,sad n,
have been mt off bv insuIIcient or iusigniGean,
measures. The consequence Is that the volume
oftho liouor troOI,c has moi boen roduocd nj oIl
within he Inst twenty voors In ovnrv citv In
Maine under Rnnuhlicnp rr,n nvca,t Portland.
,ho Io,y hos hoon AMI is obsnlnte,v ignor,a
ord ,ho on,nor,Itos rcr,,o ,,,,l., on,, ,noasnras
,,bo,oyer Gnr tho oytinc,ion oc tho low groo'
shnns nhich ,nfos, ,born ord ineic, ersa,
@, torirc mon isrgc pnmhcrs nC nonnic
~, -,
linus 10" conIauicleu Do"' 'uu Uue
people OF Maine had no dlihculty In decid-
ing that such witness must be unworthy
OF credence. We may add that q letter
from Mr.. Dow in the New York SHn of the
10Th instant, In which he attempts to ex'
plain the inconsistency between his state
ments when he was acting with the
Kepublicans and his statements wnen ne
case worse-makes it so bad that the Sun
comments on 1t in this way: