Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-06-15
Why 1T WAS PUT IN.
New Jersey sfrail TO Facs the Music
How tho Satt,uel Dem craao Oonv-n
lion Icterprs.eG the Word "Sup =
uary,"

J New Jersey Sf-sil TO Faos the Music
| bow tho Eaupuel Dem .crano Oonv-n.
tipn Ioterpre.ea the Word "Sup -.
| nary"
Dallas News.
| "Are you willing TO reia.e Tow It wss
that 81 snti-pl.nk was Lot put in the Ms
tional Democratic platform by the con-
yeution which recently met In St. L1uis?"
5 News reporter asked yesteI dsy OF the
! Hon. George Clarke of Waco, who is ia
the city sttendir g court.
h answered, 30, yes, l will give you
that" and he then proceeded to 90 Sc,
saying:
"Since the Fort Worth convention l
have regarded prohibition as C res sciu
dicsts, and have had no special tispJ-
si,ion TO renew its agiL1tion."
"Was lot the anti plank virtually put
in the platform a. Fort Wcrk?"
Sat least tina! settlement Of the ques-
ton. During the Sc seiop Of the commit
tee on platform at ST. Louis | took oCcs-
zion, in obedience 10 WCa' l elieved to
be public duty, to Call the attention Ct
the SUB COMM, tse to the double c5Gstruc
tiCn placed on the platform Of 1884, with
regard to guuptusry laws. ! did so, not
because Of any likely eject in Texas, but
for the purpose Of saving the
party in other states from the
vicissituCes through which We had
passed in Texas lSst year. Texas, with
its Dszocrstic majority, could very well
afford the fght Of last year; but state
with n1cn less Democratic majority
was likely to be wrecked by such 4 night.
Inc committee, SO far as disclosed, Tere
all ants; but members from doubtful
states, espe cislly NV Jersey, felt very
spprehensiye Of sny positive declaration
upon the question. In fscs, Governor
Albeit of New Jsrsey told me that pos
tive declaration upon the question OF
prohibition would lose his state TO the
Democratic party. Ia that view OF the
case, l contented myself with rtsenta-
ton Of the matter for the consideration
OF the national Democratic party, and l
WAS perfectly satisfied, SO far as Texas
was concerned, with the reattiEmxtion
OF the platform Of 1884, knowing
that in Texas We had nothing to fear from
prohibition, but still feeling grhvely ep-
preheDsive for those states which must
in the future encounter the storm. This,
in brief, was the situation in S.. Louis
Apart from this, too, there WAS d general
sentiment among the delegates from the
states that the Presidents message nee
essarilY precip tated the fight upon the
tariff Issue aIone, and general dispo
sition that We ought to force that issue,
disconnected from every enbarrass Dent
OF every nature OF character, believing
that with the thorough education Of the
people on the tariff issue by the general
CANVASS this fall ne would merit and re-
ceive complete success. This issue Of
our platform is the sole issue before the
people, and by it We must stand or fall "
"Wss it understood IN the convention
ths: the political mesnh & CT the word
'sUmp;uary' was a plain declaration
sglinst pr0hibition?"
"rnst WAS freely and universally con-
ceded by the members Of the committee"
"Did not some OF them express the
ides that that WAS enough to say on the
question ?"
ayes. MIR. Gorh.m himself referred
to TIE plstf5im OF 1884, saying that in its
relation to sumptut1y laws it was fufl-
GENTLY explicit for any Democrat 20 stsnd
upon; that, in fact, it could not De mis-
construed "
"What ought the state convention next
August to do on t e subject Of prohibi
tio1 2"
~ think it ought to forego sny express
sion en- the subject and content itself
with simple rest6rDatioD IL general
terms Of tie 81. Louis and Fort Worth
platforms. l do net think thai we Should
do anything TO disturb the harmony OF
the party Ny Impression is that all good
Democrats copCeoe that the prohibition
one stiun is finally ard defnitC ly Sc tiled ia
rexas. At least thai is my construction
ofdhe settlement 81 Fort Worth, and l
shall faithfully abide oy It"