The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1886-04-23

10 vote lOI men not Vi your p"ftJ, thoueh
they may be of like mind on the supreme
question before the people-in your esh-
mate of what the supreme question is-and
then You say. as to apply here. "what is
morally wrong cannot be politically right. +"
What have you proven? Why. that no
man has right To bolt his party. Who
believes that? Where is the dilemma?
Why simply here: trying to force in un.
der, the question, Hon can prohbitionists
best secure their ends?-what does not
belong there but comes under the question,
Why should men accept prohibition as the
best solution of the drink question: Why
there is just as much difference between
those questions as there is between that
John asked his wife last night, "shall we
buy land aud build house or keep on
renting;" and that he may ask her next
week when they have decided to build and
have bought and now he sits down to talk
over the questions of what kind of house
brick or frame, one or two stories--bay
windows and piazzas, coal stoves or
furnace. There are men here tonight
who will bear me witness that they have
seen multitudes of people in the mazes Of
a terrible snarl because of failure to
separate these factors--and because
into this realm where the inevitable
laws of party action must work, they
are ignored for sentiment. Would
you see it? Take that statement
vote as you Observation-Disclosures,
kof both kinds) you prayed last night
did you ask God 10 let that liquor
man slip in between two good prohi.
bisionists? But that is what you
voted. You will thoroughly mistake
me if you say l am talking against
the prohibition party. am not. 1t
has a right to live and move and
have its being l do net deny that
j, has reasons fer an existence. If |
was its advocate | should talk just as
/ am talking. What | want to force
upon you is this, that it is a party,
subject 10 all the laos 7ohich .g00eru
Parties, necessitated 10 all the com
promises, and subject to all the dan
gers Of parties; greater than the OLD
parties, if at all, simply because it
aims az prohibition; purer than the
old parties, if at all, because too
young to be very wild. But the cry
about no compromise is as far fetched,
when carried into the party as was
that of the abolition party which
lived and died an agltator l am not
speaking prophetic at all.
Here then is one cl; SIS Of prohibi-
tionists. They say we will work only
by separate party methods. We will
ride down and out one or both Of the
old parties, and then go into power.
Very well, they have that right. That
IS their answer to the "Eow" Of the
question of prohibition. That is a
partisan method. There is not a
member of the party who will claim
its right to exist any more freely than
will. That right should be respect
ed. But is it wise? Is it expedient?
Do you say these questions must not
be raised-I reply these are the only
questions. At tie tribunal Of hHmSn
JAGgmcnf n0Re ether ShaH be aA05ved.
want right here to say, and in a
spirit of utmost kindness, that in nv
opinion that which binders the care
full thought of communities from be.
ing turned toward this problem as il
ought to be, is too general denial oil
the right to question severely the
wisdom of the move. 1t is too often
the case that people are treated as
being false to the principle of prohi-
biiion because they question the ex-
pediency. And are met with the
reply, ait is not matter Of expedi-
ency, but of rlght." There is no
right but that of prudence involved
in the question, GLOW execute our
purpose? l say this because | want
the why and the how of prohibition
each discussed en- its merits.
There is one class, embracing in
its folds many near and dear 10 us
all, respected, loved, between whom
and any breath of calumny, or any
harm from partisan hate we would
place our very lives if need be, God
bless them, give them cool heads to
control their warm hearts. Listen
carefully, kindly, attentively TO the
arguments which have convinced
them that their course is wise, and il
you are convinced as they are &C
with them and may Heaven bles.
you.
There is another class of prohibit
tionists known as legislative probibi
tionists. The simplicity and consis-
tency of their position confuses mul
iiiudes of people. They seem incon
sistent because they are non-partisar
on the show" of prohibition. While
they are prohibitionists first and fore
most and always, they are Democrats
and Republicans, and Greenbackers