The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-07-07
An Open Letter to the Republicans
of Vermont.

OF late the writer has noticed in several
papers of the state letters and editorials
that some way lack the good principle of
consistency. How much is real, or how
much is unreal, the writer cannot say: he
only sees the outside, as il WERE The in
consistency consists in those statements con-
corning Senator George +. Edmunds, as
compared with certain other statements
made about two years ago concerning the
prohibition vote cast for Ex-Governor st.
John. 1t was then charged upon the pro-
hibitionists that by their withdrawal and
organization, and by their acts and votes.
the republican candidate for president was
defeated and Grover Cleveland elected
That was two years ago., Now what
Simply this 1t is now claimed that if
George F. Edmunds had heartily supported
James G. Blaine instead of sulking in his
tent" James G. Blaine would have been
elected and Grover Cleveland defeated.
Here's muddle. If the prohibitionists
Ican party, how is it now chargeabe to
George F. Edmunds Was George f. Ed
munds a prohibitionist Nay, verify. On
the other hand, if George F. Edmunds was
the cause of the defeat of the republican
party in 1884, how then were the prohibi-
tionists to blame for the republican defeat
Why not relieve yourselves of the middle
by leaving the blame on the shoulders of
the prohibition party? They can carry it
easily enough, for there are more prohibi
tionists to-day to carry it than two years
ago VI course some one is to blame for
the republican defeat in 1884, and may be
in 18SS-who can tell? But who? is the
question The writer is not champion for
Mr.. Edmunds, neither is he a mugwump
he is a republican with these questions be-
fore him. Mr.. Edmunds has served the
republican party and the nation well. No
one can dispute that fact. One bad habit
taints his name, and, because of that habit
he cannot carry the prohibition vote in Yer
mont. Aside from that habit-the curse of
many-no person is better able to succeed
Mr.. Edmunds than George f. Edmunds
But we do not hear anything said among
the republicans about his Incorporate hab-
its. That does not seem to weigh very
heavily on the mind or conscience of the
party. The stone about his neck is, d" He
did not raise a trumpet-bast for Blaine"
Yet with much complacency the republican
party claim to have done all that has been
done for the temperance cause in our land.
1t is true that in the lastquarter of a century
much has been done in our land for temper
ance, but are the republicans to be credited
with all that has been done to awaken the
people on this matter? Not altogether by
example, surely, with cafe underneath the
halls of congress. Did the republicans orig
mate, or cause to be originated las party,
public opinion against intemperance Or
did they at last awake to the fact they must
do something or decline? Look at the ac-
ton of the last New York and New Jersey
legislative bodies One refused the people
who sent them to their legislative halls the
right to vote on prohibition amendment.
The other refused the people the privilege
of local option law. Why? Because they
felt they had the power-not the right-to
refuse. Is not that true type of powers
that feel they dare act contrary to the de-
sire of the people? What can the people
do? We know what they say as for doing
let every man decide for himself in the feaI
of God. He may be slurred, called ." mug
wump," a prohibitionist =" or a" deserter;
but party should never be conscience MOI
whip and lash to any man. Let every man
regard his oath and dare to do right. That
is what the prohibition party thought to dc
two years ago. 1t is what they will try to
do two years hence; and if James G. Blaine
is again defeated, and the democratic party
is victorious, lay it again to the prohibition
lists, if you must but do not so far forge
yourselves as to attack a single man two
years afterward who during that time, may
have manhood enough to refuse the call ant
beck of party. Il,