The Portland daily press., 1888-02-28
POLITICAL PROHIBITION.
The Hon. j. n. Drummond in Reply
TO Gen. Neal Dow.

My attention has been called to the reply
of Gen. Dow to my communication in the
PRESS Concerning Prohibition"
His first point, that may not know that
among the political prohibitionists "are
great many able men and women well quail
fed to form a sound opinion" etc, is not to
the purpose; for I was not discussing their
ability or motives, but was testing the sound
ness of their opinions by actual results-by
the inexorable logic OF events. Not being
infallible, they must have the correctness OF
their conclusions so tested.
He says, 1--WE desire, and mean to obtain
the prohibition and entire suppression of
the liquor traffic, and we have no other wish
than to do this in the easiest and shortest
way" and suggests that can tell what that
way is. 4 think | can. The experience OF
forty years has demonstrated beyond ques-
ton that the only toay in which it can be
done is to create and maintain public sem
tlment In favor of the enforcement Of the
law. ! endeavored to point this out in my
other communication. l have not willingly
come to this conclusion, but experience has
demonstrated its correctness, and it is utter
folly to shut our eyes to the truth of history.
No amount of defamation will change the
hard cold facts. The friends of prohibition
must face the actual situation; if they un-
dertake to evade it the cause is lost.
On some questions of fact, am at issue
with Gen. Dow. He says that the Republi-
can party Is as much committed to 'the pro-
lection and support Of the saloons" as the
Democratic party. This statement can be
made only by one utterly misguided by pref
udice or ignorance of the facts, if he makes
the statement in good faith, as l have no
| doubt Gen. Dow does The most dangerous
| and bitter enemy of the Republican party is
the saloon; the party fully understand this,
and acts accordingly From the day OF its
| birth to the present time, every law that has
been enacted for the suppression of the sa-
loon has been the work Of the Republican
party, and in spite of the general opposition
of the Democratic party: Within week
the Republicans of New Jersey, against the
votes of the Democrats, have inaugurated
measures which will diminish, if not sup
press the evils of the saloon in that State,
provided they can pass the bill orer the reto
Of the Democratic Governor.
Whatever earnest enforcement of the law,
we do have, is the work Of the Re-
publican party. l know of no instance in
which the Democratic party have enforced
the law, except for the purpose of rendering
it obnoxious and securing its overthrow
BY implication, Gen. Dow asserts that the
Republicans nominate 'their [the rumsellersl
ticket ''to catch their votes" This Is not
true. So that the argument founded upon 1t
wholly fails. But am not to be scared out
of voting my party ticket because a few
rumselers, for some reason, also vote 1t.
Ever since became a voter have made it
practice to spend the most OF election day at
the polls, and observe the voting; and there
have been very few elections when l have
not done so. In my ward, until within
very few years, every rumseller and all his
retainers, to a man, voted the Democratic
ticket and while, within short time, few
of these have voted the Republican ticket in
my ward. more than nine-tenths OF them
and the men they control have continued to
vote the Democratic ticket. have no doubt
| that some who have voted our ticket have
done so with the idea that as the
Republican ticket was sure to be elect
ed, they would vote it in the
hope of gaining favor, on the principle of
making friends with what to them, is "the
mammOn of unrighteousness;" and have as
little doubt that their decision to do this was
largely due to the persistent assertions Of
| the political pr0hibiti0nsts that they can
gain favor in that way. Within two years,
have seen a reputed rumseller (and have no
doubt correctly so reputedl come up to the
polls Haunting the Republican ticket in his
| hand and ostentatiOusly vote it, and then
| spend the remainder of the day secretly dis
tributng Democratic tickets to his retainers,
| as they came to the polls. / could enlarge on
the results of my personal observations; but
| i will only say that If Gen. Dow, Mr.. Bay
| ley or any man desirous of learning the
| truth, will stand at the polls during an cleo
| tiOn, when the issue is between the Repub-
lican and Democratic parties, and observe
| the voting and the voters, he will be COM
| pletely cured of the folly of ever after say
ing that the Republican party is as much
| committed to the 'protection of the saloon"
as the Democratic party; and verify believe
that Gen. Dow would agree with me that the
| only hope for the full success of the prohib-
itory law is in maintaining the ascendency
of the Republican party and keeping the
! Democratic party out of power.
Gen. Dow says that, with few amend
ments to the law, 'the rumsellers would shut
up shop without fight in the courts and
stay shut up cannot believe that he in
| tended to say this; it is so utterly prep0s-
ferrous upon its face that he must have writ
| ten it carelessly. lie says in substance, also
| that we have for more than quarter OF a
| century asked 'for such legislation and
nn been refNssa with 6nen
| refused, with scorn." 'We'' have been
| patiently and fully heard always to my
| knowledge (for have been situated so as TO
| know and all the amendments asked for
have been fully considered and discussed,
and while the views of the few extreme men
| have not been fully adopted, amendments
satisfactory to the friends of prohibition
| who were deemed the wisest, most prudent
| and safest advised, have invariably been
| adopted. So it has been that for many years,
every legislature (ercept tcheR the RspubH-
| cans did not hare the control has added
| amendments TO the law l am glad that Gen.
| Dow has called attention to this matter, so
that there is opportunity to state it accu-
| rately.
| am sorry Gen. Dow read my communi-
| cation so carelessly as to understand me as
making threat, as he says did. He GER
tsinly would not Intentionally misrepresent
| me, he must have read my communication
| very carelessly. Iregret it all the more, as
| he also lost the main point OF my argument.
l am not in the habit of threatening. and
| am glad Gen. Dow n0lg recognizes the ini-
propriety of 1t, for have always regretted
/ that the political prohibiti0nists should be
! so foolish as to suppose that sensible men
would be influenced by their threats, that If
/ all their demands were not granted they
| would ''smash the Republican party" do
not propose to follow so bad an example.
But to return to what did say. l said
| then, ,and say n0w that If the political prohi-
| bitionists snould succeed in their attempt to
| reduce the Republican party TO minority,
| and give the Democrats the control OF the
| Legislature, the inevitable result will be the
| taking the teeth out of the law; and the po-
| Htical prohibitionist ariH be directly resp0n-
| sible for that result 1t will come not by Re-
| publican votes, but by Democratic votes
| which you make effective. One instance has
already happened. An effort was made
year ago in Massachusetts to submit to the
| people an amendment to the constitution
| putting prohibition into that instrument; the
proposition was defeated; dndt political
| prOhibitiOnistS defeated ID. They did not
| vote against it directly. They pursued the
same policy which they are pursuing in this
| State. In several Representative Districts,
they refused to vote for Republican ayowed
| supporters of the amendment, and threw
away their votes by voting for man who,
| they knew, stood no chance of election. The
| figures show that, in this way, enough Re-
| publican friends of the amendment were de-
feated and Democratic opposers elected, TO
hare changed the result. Had these polit-
cal prohIbitionists put their votes where they
would do the most good, the people of Mas
| sachusetts would have an early opportunity
of following the example of Maine. But
they will say 1--WE did not vote for the Dem
ocrats." True, but | fail to see, in the moral
quality of the act, any difference between
refusing to prevent an evil when one has
power TO do so, and actually assisting in its
perpetration. | cannot believe that if these
Massachusetts prohibitionists had known
what was to be the result Of their action,
they would have persisted in their course.
They certainly proved to be most danger
Gus enemies OF the prohibitory SYSTEM" and
because they did "fail to understand the me-
cessary consequences of their own acts"
We may as well recognize now, as be COM
PEELED to recognize hereafter, that q fav0ra-
Bile public sentiment is necessary for a sue