Wessington Springs herald. (Wessington Springs, Aurora County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1891, 1888-07-13
PERVERTING HISTORY.
The Position. Of the Republican Party
Toward the Liquor Traffic.
BY D. W. G. HUNTINGTON, DID.

ARcpublican journal contains an editorial
of recent date in which the following para
graph occurs:
Third party Prohibitionists persist in
claiming that their position on the liquor
question is analogous to the position of the
Republican party on the slavery question.
They pervert history when they make this
claim. The Republican party was organized
in opposition to slavery extension. and not
rs an Abolition party. Abraham Lincoln
the war of the rebellion made him such. The
Republican party was antagonistic to say-
cry. but i'll the outset proposed to limit the
Institution by restrictive Legislation. When
public sentiment was brought up to the
point where it would sustain such policy
It took ground in favor of emancipation.
The Republican party to-day occupies pre-
cisely the same position with respect to the
liquor question"
That this paragraph is in itself gross
facts can be easily shown. The term
Abolitionist. though at the first applied to
all who avowed their opposition to slavery,
came to be used more specifically to desig
nate a faction Of the American Anti Slavery
Society. which seeded under the leader
ship of William Lloyd Garrison. This fac
ton was distinguished by its opposition to
separate political action ON the part of the
Abolitionists, and by its advocacy of the
doctrines of non-resistance.
VII tuc OlllcF Uuuu, GuS kICttI DOuy VI lue
Abolitionists, by their persistence in carry
ing the anti-slavery reform to the polls. be-
came the Liberty party" and left the name
Abolitionist conventionally to the followers
of Garrison. The Liberty party contended
for emancipation just as strongly as Garri-
son, but maintaining that under the Con-
stitution the National Government could
not abolish slavery in the States. they pro-
posed emancipation in u constitutional way.
They maintained that in the District of
Columbia, in the Territories. and in every
place where the Federal Government held
supreme jurisdiction Congress should pro-
hibit slavery. In the words Of its platform
they demanded "the absolute and unqualified
divorce of the General Government from
slavery" They were thus Abolitionists..
1913. the call for the convention at Buffalo
distributed the delegates equally between
the Liberty party, the Anti-Slavery Wings,
and the Anti-Slavery Democrats. or Barn
burners" The platform adopted at this
convention demanded upon the subject Of
slavery just what the Liberty parry had all
along Observation-Disclosures Of slavery in
the Territories by act Of Congress. and hence
no more slave States, mo more compro-
misses with slavery. free soil. free speech.
was adopted unanimously. and it was just
what had been the Abolition platform from
the first Further, the Free-Soil national
platform of 1852 added nothing to that Of
184S upon the question OF slavery. and the
Republican party Of 1856 is to all intents and
question. 1t is thus seen that the Repub-
lican party was organized as an Abolition
party in all excepting the name. Upon the
slavery question it's first platform was the
very platform of the Abolitionists. We do
not mean the Garrisonians, for they took no
part in politics. and had no political plat
form. But the very position taken at first
by the AbolitiOnists who constituted the
Liberty party passed into the Free Soil and
the Republican parties unchanged by the
changes in party names.
We have no doubt that early Republican
history is most terrible rebuke to later Re-
publican degeneracy, but the attempt to
justify the false and awkward attitudes Of
the party toward the prohibition movement
by denying the facts OF its own genesis is u
desperation of method which might make
even Il partisan leader halt. The Republican
party began with principles and patriots and
unseltiSh leaders.
But the most extraordinary statement in
that the Republican party now occupies pre-
cisely the same position toward the liquor
traffic that it formerly did toward slavery.
We wonder that any man should venture
upon such an assertion.
Did the Republican party select its candi-
dates for office with reference to catching
the slave holding vO,e? Why not? 1t is
| we'll known that now it's candidates are
largely selected with reference to securing
the liquor vote.
We're there any instances in which Repub-
leans made choice of slavc-dealers for
chairmen of its political conventions? But
it now calls liquor-dealers to preside at its
conventions.
Are any cases upon record in which from
thirty to fifty shareholders were placed upon
Il single Republican committee? But that
number of lquor-dealers is now upon more
than one Republican committee i'll the State
of New York.
Were there any shareholders in the Re-
publican party? Ii not. why not? Was
the position of the party upon the subject
of slavery such that shareholders would
have been satisfied to remain in the party?
But there are 10000 liquor-dealers in the
Republican party. and well pleased to remain
| there.
We're there any Republican Legislatures
in which laws prohibiting slavery were re-
| pealed and laws licensing slavery sub
stitutcd? But there have been at least
eight Republican Legislatures IN which