Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1888-08-14
10 DR.. BROOKS.

Assaulted by Prohihitionist-Iawa
Heard From.
Des Moines. Iowa, July 2l-Dr. John
A. Brooks: These appear in some OF
your reported speeches, some things
that appear to me to be unfair to those
prohibitionlsts who do not look at this
question as you do. You have much to
say of conscience votes" and "men OF
conscience" and such phrases, in which
you assert that the prohibitionists who
do not agree with your wild goose, third
party movement are not acting accord
ing to their conscientious convictions.
AS you and l are 90 workers 10 the same
church and acting together reI,giously,
| IL Is query to me wnen you became the
Keeper OF the consciencee if your breth-
ren. You do yourself gross injustice,
as well as others, when you assume any
| such position. for certainty where there
are five prohlbitopsts who will not vote
your ticket for every one that will, it
cnmes With poor grace for one to charge
tie five with acting hypocritically In
their decision. Now have, as you we'll
| know. been prohibitionist all my life,
and it ls not SAYING anything In an
egotistio sense if / say have done as
much for the cause of prohibition as you
bave. You have been in Missouri for
n suy years where the democratic psrty
hes been in large maj 2rity, and you
5ave been member OF that party, and
what have you done iu that party or
With your thlrd party to get prohibition
Absolutely nothing. have been in Iowa
a n ma Fnp Nf hn
| and worked in that line, and with what
result? We have one OF the best pro-
hlbitory laws in Iowa that has ever been
made, and it is as well enforced as any
other law. | have followed no Igpus
fatus of third party Impracsicabjlity
You haYe. Now what ls the result +? NY
state is proh,bltory, yonrs is not, and
yet, forsooth, because l can not con-
scisntiously follow your method that
hes proved failure, and abandon my
own that has proved a success, / am to
| be accounted as lacking conscience.
| Did you ever think, my brother, that it
is possible you are mistaken, and that
the beam may be in your own eye?
Aga'n; we have 10000 prohibition
lists in Iowa. OF that number, 149 600
! win vote the republican ticket, and 1000
for your third party ticket Allow me
10 suggest that it IS possible that the
l49 may be SIS wise and honest as the
one, 1t IS true, one may be wiser than
| l49, but 1t is not very good taste nor very
good morals for the one to say that he
is the oniy honest one.
| And what is trde of the state of Iowa,
is IL ile the country over. And. as said
hefore, you caruot possibly hope to poll
more than one-tifth of the aotual prohi-
bltion vote for your ticket, end is it moi
possible that the four who refuse to vote
it may not be as w;ae and conscientious
Us the one who does? When you say
they Gre not, you are violating one of the
cardinal principles of the religion we
both profess, to Judge not thy brother,
While am at this matter there are 9
few other thugs to which wish to cal
your attention. The only states in which
prohibition is malntaiued to-day are re,
publican states and yet You make fight
against the republican party, SO that the
prohibltio party may take les place In
1892. Very we'll, look at the result.
Iou break down prohibition where 1t If
already established, for you concede that
the democratic party is opposed to the
principle; you make enemies of all mer
In the republican party by your fight
! against them and what IS the result
You keep free whiakey democratic
party in power for generation at least
But you begin to compare yourself tc
the abolition party. You have studied
history to little advantage if you can see
anything in that. LII the abolition party
had continued on its radical ground
what would have been the result? Sla-
very would have been rational to-day
IL Abraham Lincoln had taken his stend
on platform Of absolute abolition, he
would have been defeated and slavery
would have been more firmly entrenched
than ever. So the good sense OF the
people said we will prohibit slavery iu
the territories, where We have jurisdic.
tion, and leave the matter to the states
and on this principle they won. So II
MIR. Harrison had stepped on radical
prohibition platform at Chicago, he
would have been defeated and whisky
entrenched for generation. But as he
is on the common ground IN favor o
local government of the matter by The
states, while adopting the general prIn
oiple OF Temperance ia all ways, or rathe
on anti SELDOM ground, he will be elected
and the great temperance reform vii
move on. Why can you NOT be al
wise as the old abolititionisit
who supported Fremont and Lin.
ooln on less radical platform
than they deemed exactly right. Yo,
may talk OF conscience and ali that, bu
conscience without common sense il
only fansticism in arepnblio like ours. /
troubles my conscience to think that tn,
only obstacle in the way of ultimat,
prohibition is the utter impracsioability
OF those who blindly put out hopeless
third party ticket TO stop the progress
OF events to that esd. Besides, you
party 1s not acting on high moral plane
You confess that the democratic part,
, is opposed to prohibition, and that yol
intend to oppose 1t after you hav
! beaten the republican party. When
my gooG brother, did you adopt tn
principle, We will do evil that good ma,
come? You will pnt the devil in powe
that you may fight him. Verify. il tha
, is conscience, am thankful I have non
of that kind.
3 / will not burden you with the man
{ inconsistencies OF your opposition to tn
repub,: can party Because the repub
llcan party says that rather than breal
!! down the protective tariff system the
would IN contingency repeal the tax o.
liquors, you abuse chem, or rather you
: spokesmen do. and cali them the "fre
whisky party" when in the very plat
form on which you stand ihere is
declaration in favor OF the uuconditions
3 and immediate repeal of that tax. Doe
iyous conscience endorse such an incor
sistenoy? If it does, am happy to SO