Morris tribune., 1888-09-05
HOW PROHIBITION CAME re


Every prohibitionIst should oare-
fully read the following from the
Iowa State Register:
Ten years ago the subject of con-
stitutional amendment prohibiting
the manufacture and sale ofintoxicat-
ing liquors was being generally dis
cussed. A distinct Prohibition party
had been organized In 1875, running
a candidate for Governor, who re-
ceived about ], 400 votes. Two years
later, the Prohibition candidate for
Governor received 1859 votes, or in
1879, two years later the Prohibition
candidate for Governor received S,25e
votes, indicating the decline of the
third party, and the judgment of sim
cere temperance people that prohi-
bition was not to be obtained through
such partisan meth DDS.
Meantime the question was being
discussed and considered with in
creasing interest and earnestness.
But tie good judgment'of it's friends
took it out Of partisan politics to the
forum of the schoolhouse, the church,
the public meeting and wherever
men could consider it unbiased and
untrammeled by partisan relations.
Public sentiment was being educ ated
to favor prohibition, and public
opinion became 30 strong that in def
erenoelto it the RepublicansIdecided, lin
the legislature of 1880, to submit to
popular vote a constitutional amend
ment. It was necessary that such q
proposition should pass two success
i've legislatures, and this was done in
1880 and 1882, Republicans voting to
submit and Democrats voting no,
and the special non-partisan election
was ordered for May 80, 1882. The
result Of that election showed that
the prohibitory amendment was adj.
opted by nearly 30 900 majority.
The action Of the Republican party
SO far had been a continued response
to public sentiment, and what seemed
to be the majority will of the state.
Before the new law was put into eff
feet test case was taken to the SUI
prerne court, which decided that
thsre had been an informality or ir-
regularity In the passage Of the pro-
position through the Legislature suf-
ficient to invalidate 1t, and render the
law unconstitutional. The Republic
can party had then but the one
course open which In honor and with
due regard to les duty to the people,
IL could follow. It knew that the
popular will had declared for prohi-
bitten. A teshnicality In the passage
of the amendment had made it inyal-
Id. The only thing left for the party
to do was to respect that will by pass
ing statute. making good what had
been lost. The party pledged itself
to do SO, and on that issue fought the
campaign Of 1888, and opened the
legislature of 1884 with a majority Of
but one in the house OF representa-
lives. Every influence which the
liquor power could command was
brought to bear to have the party
break its pledge to the people. Like
a wall Of granite the Republican ma
jority In the House and Senate stood
by its plighted faith, even bringing
from his sick-bed a member with a
broken leg whose vote was the one
needed In the House to keep the
pledge and pass the bill.
But the Republican party kept its
promise and passed the present pro-
hibitory law. which went into effect
July 4of that same year, 1884. Two
years later the law was supplemented
by what is known as the Clark In
junction law, adding facilities for the
more stringent enforcement Of prohi-
bition, ana this, like each preceding
measure was passed by the Republi-
can majority and steadily opposed
by the Democratic minority. So the
present law, pronounced by many to
be the best prohibitory law In the
United States, ID entirely the result
OF non-partisan efforts, assisted by
the Republican party when public
sentiment was 90 strong as to indicate
q genera desire for 1t, and o general
dispositlon to enforce 1t after IL
should be given. The third party
Prohibitionists cannot claim that It
was their separate organization that
compelled the Republicans to take