Morris tribune., 1888-04-11
CORRESPONDENCE.
EDITOR TRIBUNE:

EDITOR TRIBUNE:
The Prohibition Column in your
last issue was we'll labeled. "Monkery"
is very good and appropriate name
tor the bundle of inconsistencies and
evasions which appeared under that
title. l congratulate the editors of
the P. c. on the ability they show as
sophists, and suggest, that if such
ability were accompanied by greater
display of good nature, it would APP
pear to better advantage.
The statement that the s. p. has
done nothing to advance the temper
ance cause sounds decidedly silly in
view of the facts that it was the Re-
publican party which gave to Iowa
her prohibition law, and that they
are republican officials who are now
enforcing that law.
It was the G. o. p. which passed our
high license law, and against the
combined opposition of democrats,
prohibitionists, and saloon keepers:
and there are good reasons for be-
lieving that our next legislature I'M
less it is captured by the combination
above named-will pass a county
option law. Farmers will then have
a chance to sQuelch the saloons; and
they will do it too in four counties
out of five. 1t is useless to discuss
the pro and con of the high license
question, but it must be admitted
| that majority of republicans honest
ly believe that our license law Is a
temperance measure and therefore in
passing said law they plainly showed
that they are opposed to the saloons.
If republicans are mistaken, it is
missionary work that is needed in
stead of third party.
The editors of the P. G. mis-stated
what 1 said about the Anti-Saloon
Republican organization. The Emis-
statement was probably not inten-
tional, but they should be q little
more careful, for it is foolishness to
set up a proposition of their own
manufacture and then by knocking it
down think that they are refuting Re-
publican's argument, and proving
his lack of information. Speaking of
the Anti-Saloon republicans I said
that two years ago their organization
had no existence. It was not formed
until September 10th 1886 or but little
over eighteen months ago. 1t is an
organization that must do its work
through the primaries and conven-
tions of the Republican party, which
party in 1886 had nominated its can
didates and adopted its platforms
long before the organization in ques-
ton was existent. The Prohibs should
not condemn that organization be-
cause of anything it failed to do be-
fore it was born.
The Prohibs are again "off" when
they accuse the writer of mistaking
the facts concerning the opposition of
their party to the internal revenue
tax on whiskey, and if they Will cody
and carefully peruse that part of my
former letter they will be compelled
| to admit that the mistake is OH their
side. 1 am anxious to know why the
internal revenue tax OH whiskey is
any more immoral than the internal
revenue tax on tobacco; or the tax of
that kind which was a few years ago
levied upon matches, and I suggest
that if the Prohibs oppose the govern
ment tax on whiskey because said
tax is approved by whiskey makers,
they should, to be consistent approve
of our state tax upon the saloon bust
ness because it is opposed by the sa-
loon keepers.
must explicitly deny that in my
use of the word "abolitionists" / in
tentionally retired to any political
party, on the contrary / used the
word as believe it was generally
used by Northern people before the
war. Had 1 referred to o party the
word in question would have been in
the singular instead of the plural
form.
In conclusion, I wish to ask the
editors of the P. c. a few plain ques.
lions; and I hope they will try to
answer them plainly, candidly, and
good naturally. LIST. do you admit or
deny that large majority of the Re-
publican party of this state is against
the liquor traffic? End, If you admit
the existence of said majority, what
is to prevent 1t from carrying both
party and state for prohibition, as
was done in Iowa? 3rd, If you deny
that such majority exists, how do
you explain your statements: "The
best men of the North are in the Re-
publican party and "the overwhelm-
ing public sentiment of this country
| is against the saloon;" aud how do
you explain the fact that In 1885 the
republicans carried this state against
the opposition of prohibitionisfs, sa-
loon keepers and democrats.
REPUBLICAN,.