San Marcos free press. [volume] (San Marcos, Tex.) 1877-1892, 1886-07-01
"Moral suasIon' Illustrated.

There having been q great deal o
twaddle indulged in by certain clas'
OF papers concerning the action o.
the temperance men Of the Press As
sociation with respect to the invita-
ton TO visit the San Antonio brewery
we copy the following article from
Gatesyille Advance-Sun, which set'
the matter in a clear light, and is al
unanswerable yindication of the nc
ton aforesaid.-ED. FREE FREss,
The Prohibition contest in the re-
cent session of the Texas Press As
sociation was fit illustration of the
tenacity with which moral suasion
lists do not cling to their theory
There are number of journals in
Texas, edited by good men, which
oppose Prohibition; but these same
papers, in times when the question
is being agitated, yell at the top OF
their voice for "moral suasion.
Temperance is all right they say,
"but Prohibition is undemocratic and
interferes with the liberty of the citi-
zen"
At the session of the Press Associ'
alton last month the question came
up, aud rs is usual in such cases, the
beer interest brought it up. Pre-
suming that the Texas editors were
composed largely of beer.swillers, the
'entertainment committee" put on
the programme n visit to a brewery.
There were n number of gentlemen
in the body who were not beer drink
ers, and they kindly asked that that
part be struck from the programme.
This was moral suasion in its pristine
purity, No attempt was made to
pass Prohibition resolution in the
Association; it was only desired to
place the brewery where it belonged
in the category of drunkard-malling.
But this brought about discussion,
and as DR.. Yandell was the acknowl.
edged leader of the beer side, we
copy from his paper, the San Angelo
Enterprise. He says:
"The action of the Prohibition edi
tors, in the Texas Press Association,
in voting against accepting the invi-
tation of the citizens OF San Antonio
to visit brewery, is entirely consist
ent with the general illiberality which
has always characterized the Prohibi-
ton press throughout the country.
No ones denies that there are abuses,
dependent upon the manufacturers
of malt liquors for their existence,
but the remedy is not in the prohib-
iting the manufacture or sale of Ii
quors. The doctrine of the Prohibi-
ton press, is, and has always been,
antagonistic to some of the most sac
red of our constitutional rights.
There may be restriction, but there
must not be Prohibition. There are
millions of men who use wine and
liquors constantly and are not moral
ly or physically injured thereby"
No one attempted Prohibition. 1t
was only desired to place the Associ-
alton on record rs q body of sober
men-men who did not design, in
their official capacity, to endorse the
business of manufacturing drunk
ards.
There is moral in all this. 1t is:
Moral suasion don't persuade. The
great moguls of "temperance"--
those who had preached temperance
and fought Prohibition--were all
solidly against their own doctrines.
If the Temperance" editors had prac-
ticed their own preaching the brew
cry would have been set down upon
with a vigorous emphasis. AS it
was. the temperance men" left their
''moral suasion" and voted for the
brewery straight out from the shoul-
der.
1t was stated on the floor of the
convention that the resolution against
the brewery was an ''insult' to San
Antonio. If there was any insult in
it, it originated in the presumption
on the part of San Antonio that the
members of the Texas Press Associ-
alton were beer swillers
The Advance-Sun is in favor OF
moral suasion and its editor voted
against the brewery. We would also
remark that all the work that is be-
ing done for ''moral suasion" is being
done by Prohibitionists. The other
crowd never get father that the first
syllable of the term. They get to
mor--that is, more red eye.