Wessington Springs herald. (Wessington Springs, Aurora County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1891, 1888-10-19
THE REPUBLICAN, PAR TY.
fTs RECORD AS TO TEMPERANCE
LEGISLATION.

1t Docs Not Aim to Seriously CrippleE tho
saloon-A Summary Of the Party's Dec.
larationx and Actions In the state and
Nation.
FROM the Wisconsin Prohibitionist.l
we have received SO many requests from our
the Republican purity as an Anti ProhiRition
party that though our columns have heretoyore
c con nearly all the facts We hero pres}nt
This testimony be collected for ready use.
,. Inc claim OF many temperance Republicans
10 snat tne republican party has given nll the
and therefore 10 vote against the party is to
destroy our hope for further legislation.
~ me Prohibitionists declare (l that the Demo-
cratic party has given a part Of the Temperance
legislation; ~ that the Temperance leuislation
OF Maine, Kansas and Iowa was not inaIgurated
t ~ me republican party and is supported by
the people regardless Of party favor it. and no
par y can retain power that docs not at least
make maze some plausible show of sustaining the
prohtbitory law; t3 that in the late election for
state amendments tho Republican party had
oroken faith with the temperance people; "a
snat the high, license laws Of Nebraska, Mime
sofa. New York, and other States are favorable
prohibition and benefit to the traffic: Isl that
county option the most effective prohibitory
IN democratic States, and is in no sense q Rs
publican measure; tG) that the national platform
mtteran:es Of The Republican party have been
that tho leading newspapers OF the party have
declared against the principle Of prohibition
, ana IN favor OF the liquor element; ls that
large number OF liquor dealers aud saloon poll
ticlans vote with the Republican party ami
stand high In its councils o. the people Of Wis.,
consn nave nothing to hope from the Republic
prohibition; us) that national party alone chi
henceforth secure even tho most local of pro.
Il: On point one we give the summary of tht
chicago Daily Ne,cs, q very reliable Independent
paper:
.The States that have adopted State pro-
hib,tory laws under Republican LegislaturesI
are as follows: New York, 1855; Michigan, 1855,
New Hampshire 1856; Maine, 1853; Massa.
Ghusetts, 1859 Rhode Island, 1874 Kansas, 1881
makes In all nine prohibitory laws adopted BY
the Republicans, counting Rhode Island twice
The States that. with Republican legislatures,
with the dates. are as follows: New York, 1855 :;
Iowa, 1856; Indiana, 1858; Rhode Island, 1868 !:
nestak 1sS Con
Michigan, 1875; Rhode Island again 1875. This
makes in all ten prohibitory State LAWS that
have been dropped by the Republican Legisla-
lures counting Massachusetts and Rhode
.The States that, having Democratic Legis-
iatures. have adopted prohibitory laws, with the
ritory, 1852; Michigan, 1858; Ohio, ls54: Iowa
1855 1855 Indiana, 1855; Nebraska az a Territory,
Carolina, 1881. This makes twelve prohibitory
State laws adopted by Democratic Legislatures,
counting duplicate.
latures. have dropped State prohibition are fill
Ohio 1859.
In the States of Vermont, 1855; Connecticut,
PoDn0VlVRnia <hc ,it,;ko
laws were passed by Wing Legislatures The
American party in Delaware pass cd a prohib-
itory law III 1856 and repeale it missy.
"As the account stands, Republican Legislatures
have passed nine prohibitory l.ws in eight
States. and have repealed ten Irohibitory laws
in eight States; Democratic Laoislatnres haze
ana navs deo:ned or nuiiified five prohibitory
laws In fiyO States. In this Texas Is included
as ole II the five States. The Democrats in
that State did not repeal the law. but so modi-
operative.
I'm this estimate local-option Or high license
laws are not included, only State prohibitory
enactments.
by the Democratic party in 184j, and strength.
ened in 1851, before the Republican party had its
birth: The law has been fairly enforced in the
smaller towns ana country places Of the Sthte
under Republican rule-both parties favoring
the law in their platforms. But in the larger
seaport towns where the liquor dealers have
permitting the sale OF liquor by Republican sa-
loonists. The leading liquor dealers Of Boston
ship openly to al. these cities large consign-
constantly increasing.
In Kansas the amendment was not Repub-
lican measure as the following from the Repub-
lican platform of 1884 will show:
"ResolUed, That prohibition has by O vote of
the people, without distinction Of party been
adopted as the organic law of the land"
Republican ticket defeated by a large majority,
because he persisted in enforcing the prohitory
law. The present Governor: Martin, was OPP
fairly enforced. Yet in Topeka the State, county
and city attorneys are aware of tbs fact that
nearly 100 LIQUOR Joints pay regular fine and
law is due, not to any determination Of party
leaders to enforce prohibition but because the
party dies by the hand Of the people when it
Much the same thing may be said of Iowa as
of Kansas, and the following from the Republi-
can platform Of 1885 will prove it:
made the support OF prohibition q test of party
loyalty. - 1t 1.-THE Republican partyl has
pledged its honor to enact a law which the peo-
held, had ordered, by an unguestionable ma
lority, that came alike from Republicans and
Democrats"
81 In the late amendment elections, notably
in Michigan, Ohio and Texas, tho Republican
party did not keep faith with the Temperance
people In Michigan, the amendment was SUBJ
tion Of whose members worked against the
amendment. Detroit. which gave Garfield a
majority, gave, by the most obvious fraud, hut
The precinct of Bessemer that contained but
1,40O inhabitants. gave u majority of over 1000
against the amendment. These frauds the Re-
publican Legislature persistently refused to in
vestigate. Every Republican d lily in the State,
and lnrge portion OF the weeklies. opposed the
amendment. The most powerful speaker against
it was ID. B. Dufield, IL leading Republican. The
Legislature then passed q local-option law, with
o flaw in it. The flaw was pointed out to them
before its passage, and could have been correct
ed, but was not and was declared unconstit l.
tional
The vote in Ohio in 1888 was 323, 1S9 for the
amendment, out of q total of So, 1874. A major
ity of 81, 2l4 was cast for the amendment, but q
majority Of all the votes cast for State officers
was required by the constitution, and it failed
1t is very apparent that many more than enough
votes to carry the amendment were suppressed
in the final count
az The high-l laws of Republican States
are not injurious nor intended to bo injurious to
the traffic. Concerning this measure the Chi
cago Tribune of Jan. II. 1888, says:
High license. reasonably and properly en-
the present temper of the people i'll almost
every State of the Union"
And again. jan. 5, 1883, it says:
Had Iowa adopted a high-license law ton
years ago, Prohibition would never have OBJ
tanned in that State"
The Minneapolis Tribune and St. Paul Pioneer
Press urged tho high-license law in that State
as q bar to Prohibition, and pleaded with the
iuuOr-dealers to favor it as q benefit to their