The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-07-03

WEDNESDAY, July ..
The Democratic Party aud Temperance


a few remarks as 90 tho attitude OF tho
democratic party toward the liquor quea'
ton.
The first communication IL from pro-
hihltloniat, aud Ii as follows
To fHR EpToR-Sri Your article In last
sundays SENTfNKI. under the title of "PTohibi'
ton Defeats bTeathes such spirit OF fairness
ana wears such an air OF honest sincerity that
am encouraged 90 ask tho privilege of giving
you aud II you please, your readers glimpse
81 this same subject seen from the stand
point of prohibitlonist' You say. During
that period THE nine amendment elections OF
the last two years. the prohibitionists have not
carried a single state, aud you therefore con
elnde that ''this ought To be conclusive eyi.
denee 20 the prohibiuonsts that the country IL
against them"
This does not logically follow. The elections
furnish conclusive evidence that two great pO
litieal parties are in favor of maintaining our
present licensed saloon system-this aud moth
ing more.
The republicans in the northern states and the
democrats in the southern, submitted the
amendment with the deliberate purpose OF de.
featng H. and 10 this end they brought the
political machinery of the party TO bear In
Texas and In Pennsylvania the political organs
81 each dominant party opposed the amend
ment and assumed the active defense OF the
liquor traffic, thus defeating the proposed
amendment in each case. No intelligent pro.
bibitionist expected anything else. How could
he, when the ballot-box and the whole election
machinery were IN the hands Of the enemies oil
the measure, who stood ready to defeat 10 by
any fraud necessary TO that end? No intel
leeut temperance democrat can longer expect
relief from the saloon curse IN any action OF his
party, since IL refused relief IN Texas, where u
had the whole matter IN its control by reason
ri IL large majority IN that state; nor can any
honest republican be deceived any more by
professions OF hostility 20 the saloon, 80 freely
indulged IN by bis party heretofore, since, with
= republican majority OF sO,UO IN fennsyl
vania that republican state gave majority OF
10000 in favor of sustaining the saloon sys.
TEN.
All this from our standpoint, only proves
that the two great political parties are domin-
ated by the liquor power; but it does not prove
that the people will always submit 10 the
domination OF this tyrant. Il L. BROWN.
indianapolis, June u.
our correspondent is not logical. We
said, in substance. that nine successive de
feats OF the prohibitionists in as many
different st ties in various sections OF the
republic demonstrated that the country
was agains; prohibition. Mr.. BRowN says
these elections do not demonstrate this,
but only show that two great political
parties are in favor OF maintaining our
present licensed saloon system" Now as
these two great political parties comprise
al least nine-tenths OF the voting popula-
ton of the country, it is idle TO say that
il they are against prohibition the coun-
try is not against it. The two parties are,
practically, the country; and the country,
in the sense Of the ruling forces OF govern
ment, are thetwo political parties. When
the two parties speak, the country speaks.
Our friend charges that the machinery
Of the dominant parties in Pennsylvania
and Texas was used against the amend
ments. This may be true; but it does not
explain the tremendous adverse MAORI
ties in those states. The popular will can
sometimes be nullifed by the skillful use
Of political machinery; but no political
machine-no two political machines
could secure a majority OF $4,000 in Penn
sylvania against a measure which the
people of the state favored. To suppose
that this could be accomplished is to pro-
nounce the experiment of popular gov
eminent a failure.
Our correspondent interprets the pro-
hibition defeats as triumphs of the 'liquor
power" We are sure he is mistaken in
this. The liquor power in this country is
steadily losing ground. Pennsylvania re
iected prohibition, not at the instance OF
the liquor power, but because a majority
Of her voters believed that the principle
OF prohibition was false, and that there were
other methods of dealing with the liquor
evil more rational and effective. Penn
sylvania has high license law, which has
produced excellent results. 1t has greatly
diminished the number of drinking places
and the consumption Of liquor; yields
large revenue and does not infringe upon
individual rights or seek to invade the do
main OF private judgment and conscience.
The Pennsylvania people are certainly
wise n refusing 10 abandon such a system
for one which is radically unsound in
theory and futile in practice.
The other communication alluded to is
rs follows:
To THE EDfToR-Sir: VIII you please de
fine in clear and explicit language the position
of the democratic party IN Indiana upon the
liquor traffic?
make this request OF you for the reason that
. strong effort is being made in this county 70
commit the party TO prohibition or local OPP
tion. both Of which are anti-democratic as I
understand the position of the party upon the
liquor question. KY
Greenfield, Ind, June %.
Local option and prohibition are, in
principle, the same. The former is simply
prohibition by retail. IL contemplates
the exercise by the majority of the power
10 dictate 10 the minority in matters OF
personal right. The democratic theory OF
government is certainly in conflict with
this policy. Democrats believe in the
largest measure of individual liberty con-
sistent with social order and the public
security. They do not believe that the
state should usurp the functions of pr-
vate conscience. Ii is for this reason.
and not because of special regard for the
interests OF those engaged in the liquor
traffic, that democrats oppose such
schemes "A local option and state prohibit
ton. The democratic party recognizes
the evils that flow from the abuse of liquor,
and is in favor of all measures which will
tend 10 restrain those evils without vio-
latinR sound principles of government
A rigid license system, with strict regula-
ton Of the liquor traffic, sproperly within
the sphere Of the police power OF the
state. Such a system is in operation all
ovar Throne and America The derno-