New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1889-01-30
A1KtslkEN XsES Il
NEW ULM, MINI.
Wednesday, Jan. 80, 1859.
A SINGULAR F.A

K / 81 Z i 1 c !
Nobody has called Afternoon to the
singular fact, which is not without its
significance, that the advocates of pro
hibitions alone are the only people who
ask that their views of the proper meth
cd Of dealing with the saloon shall be
embodied in constitutional amend
ment We ask the public to consider
this singular fact. The liquor dealers
have been very active everywhere il
attempts to influence legislation. They
are well organized, they ale as earnest
as men usually are where their personal
and pecuniary interests are involved,
and they are generally in favor Of low
license. Wherever they obtain control,
they set the license fee as low as posi-
BILE. But we have yet to hear of any
proposition on their part to. add to the
constitution of state an amendment
declaring that no local authority shall
exact license fee greater than a fixed
maximum agreeable to themselves.
The high license people have dis
tinct principle and policy. They are
most earnest friends of temperance,
and promoters of reform. They can do
what no other body of men proposing
aremedy for the evils of intemperance
can do: and that is to show practical
results, extending over large areas Of
territory and through considerable per-
iods Of time, proving that high license
will accomplish all that is claimed for
it. If there are any persons fully en-
titled to ask for their views the sanction
of a constitutional amendment, it is
surely the believers in high license.
Take Minnesota, for example. where a
high license law has produced results
that are quoted with pride by friends
Of temperance the country over, and
where the community has decided with
overwhelming force in favor of main
tanning the law, Having justified their
faith by their works, the high license
element would surely have the right to
ask that an act so benefcent should be
protected from repeal or alteration by
the shield of a constitutional amend
ment making it q part OF the funda-
mental law, But we know of no move
ment or desire to move in that direc-
ton.
1t is the prohibitionist alone who
clamors for an invasion of the constitu-
ton. The utter improperly of his de-
mand on abstract principles has been
exposed, beyond the possibility of salts
y factory answer, in the letter of the Hon.
81 Gorden r. Cole, recently published.
But there is food for thought also in the
singular phenomenon that such a de-
mand is heard only from the side OF
( prohibition. All other people, however
Ii decided their views and however exalt-
ed their conception of the issues at
stake, are willing to abide by the results
Of experience, and to trust their case to
the repl esentatives of the people. The
prohibitionist demands that his method
shall be set at once beyond the reach of
popular disapproval or desire for
change. The reasons for the difference
are near the surface. The thesis of pro-
hibition is an intolerant disregard of
local policy and of the wish Of minor
lily. rests upon despotism, and can
never be enforced except by the unlim-
tied exercise Of inquisitorial and punt
tive powers lodged outside Of the com.
munity affected. 1t fears the free exer-
else OF public opinion, after a season of
practical trial. 1t is not satisfied with
a law, ample for it's purposes if it could
do what it claims, but must clamor for
the protection of the constitution, where
it has no rightful place. That prohibi-
tionists alone, of all those who think
they have a remedy for intemp erance,
should ask for recognition in the con-
stltution, is one good reasoe why they
should be denied. PIONEER Press.
When the members Of the legislature
drew their first pay they were each al
lowed Is cents per mile for the distance
Travelled in coming to the capital and
returning to their various homes. The
mileage was reckoned on most liber-
al basis. too. The board Of railroad
commissioners, a creation of the legis-
lature, some time ago issued it's famous
order making the maximum rate to be
charged on the roads Of the state 8 cts.
mile. In view of this fact, it is a
trife remarkable that the legislators
should take from the state an amount
five times as large as the railroads are
allowed to charge them-provi they
were forced to pay their fare. As a
matter Of fact, it is probable that the
L.