Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1886-10-01
THE ANTI-sALooN CONFERENCE.

bGcp IOWdIu very HhuCH HCS1Cu
reform.
=
THE ANTI-sALOON CONFERENCE.
Hon. S. D. Hobson, of Brighton,
one of the State delegates to the
Antl-Saloon convention at Chicago
has returned home. Last week we
published q letter from him show
ing what had been done by the con-
vention. He asserts that the dele
gates were there as Republicans,
but to our mind the Republican
party is not much wiser as to its
practical purpose than before it as
sembled. The Chicago Tribune says:
1t (the convention) has formulat-
ed no scheme that goes to the root
of the matter. 1t has not shown
how the Temperance cause" can be
promoted, as 1t committed itself
neither to prohibition, high license,
moral Suasion nor the Democratic
plan of free whisky, which the Pro
hibitionists themselves are encour.
aging by turning their strength in
effect over to that party. 1t has
enunciatcd several we'll meaning
platitudes, which need not be dis
puted, but it has presented no def
mite or practical plan for the promo
ton of the cause of temperance.
In substance the resolutions OK
tend no further than the declaration
that the Republican party is a tenn
peranco party (Which does not mean
coercive teetotalism), that saloons
are an evil, and that the liquor traffic
ought to be wiped out. They do
not suggest any method, however, of
curing the human appetite for liquor
or of enforcing paper prohibition,
or of wlping out saloons. They do
not tell US how teetotal legislation
is to be enforced when the popular
sentiment is opposed to it. They
do not even suggest the necessity
of reforming that popular sentiment
by moral suasion or other practical
methods up to the point Of accept
ing prohibition and enforcing it..
They do not inform us how the mi
nority in any city or county can
compel the majority to abstain from
drinking or to accept their prohibi-
tory views, or how the minority in
any county can elect officials who
will carry out coercive teetotalsm.
This certainly was point worthy
of consideration.
Senator Blair, in his speech before
the conference, declared that as
against free liquor he was for low
license, as against low license he
was for high license, and as against
high license he was for prohibition
All of which simply means that he
is for prohibition. But why did he
not tell us how he would enforce
prohibition in communities that arc
opposed to it? and how he would
compel an overwhelming majority
of a city to submit to the orders Of
a small minority in regard to stump
tuary matters? Ii prohibition can
be enforced against the will of the
majority why did he not tell us how
or point to the places where it is,
and give us the whole n1od~s oper-
0ndi? This would have been some
thing to the point.
1t would have been more satisfac-
tory, therefore, if Senator Blair Of
New Hampshire and the conference
had explained how they propose tc
carry out the so-called remedy OF
prohibition. Instead of that, they
have offered no suggestion either
practical or philosophical that cures
the appetite for liquor or promotes
temperance. They have not even
considered the question from the
right point of view. They make
the same mistake as the Prohibition
lists themselves by striking at til,
supply instead of the demand, a
the seller instead of the drinker
They do not seem to realize that i
they could quench the thirst there
would be no demand for the liquo
and the saloons would close up ant
stay closed. Until the demand fo
liquor can be abolished paper prohi
bition Of selling will accomplish
precious little for temperance.