New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-03-10
,1oroR 1ND DEMoCRACY.

IIOUUR AHD ObhON"~
The Liquor and Prohibition alliance IN Ne"-
Jersey begins to bear fruit. BY dint Oh caucus
dictaton, party discipline and personal influence
the Democrats managed to concentrate all 'neir
votes in the Senate upon the bill repeating the
Local. Option and High-License law, ana passed
il ON Friday by a vote Of IL Democrats aealnso
0 Republicans. The Democratic measure no'
only reduces license, but would render IL aS
nearly ineffective as possible, and 1t sub sutu'eS
for County Option a species OF township opuoh
which would take from the people as lar as
posSible the power to limit or prevent the hquor
traffic near their homes
This bill has been framed for the express
purpose of satisfying the hquor-deaierS' VIM VIM
pulled the Democratic party through laSV Iaii
by work and bribery upon pledge unaO inc
existing law should be repealed. Being intended
to satisfy them and to meet the pieogeS Vi
Democratic managers, the measure could hoC Do
expected to please any sincere temperance 'oCeT'
Competent lawyers hold that it is unconstitu-
tional in its new provisions, and ii so these
could not be enforced, while the repeal OF the
existing law will stand, leaving the hquor
traffic entirely unrestrained and by Ihe
people understandable. To all appearance
that is the intention. But township option
is regarded by intelligent temperance voters as
scarcely better than no option at ALL IL
tovnship votes for virtually prohibitive Ii
cense it only drives the traffic across the near
est boundary line into another township winch
imposes no such restraint. The liquor can Do
obtained as freely as if there were no reStric,
ton whatever, the jug and demijohn trade VIII
flourish, neither the morals, the peace nor the
homes of either town will be protected, and
meanwhile the driving-out of the traffic will
affect the value of some taxable property. IL
would appear to be the way to get the largest
amount of loss and trouble with the least
amount of benefit.
But if temperance voters consider this most
Questionable change let them ask who is re-
sponsble for it. They were fully and fairly
warned last fall that Democratic Legislature
would be pledged to the liquor interest to re-
peal the existing law. They were warned thao
the running of separate candidates called Pro
hibitionists would only help the liquor interest.
Nevertheless about 5000 of these so-called
temperance voters did support such candidates,
and in numerous cases thus secured the defeat
of Republicans who were pledged to sustain the
existing law. No other body of men in the
State is more responsible for the vote in the
Senate on Friday than the so-called temper
ance voters and the leaders whose advice they
followed. They gave the liquor Interest the
power to make laws for the State, and did 1t
knowingly, deliberately, and with their eyes
open.
II would be an insult to the intelligence Of
these veters to suppose that they failed to
understand the consequences Of their action.
They were persuaded, or persuaded themselves
that it was moro important to run candidates
who had no chance of election whatever than
to uphold a law under which the liquor traffic
had been ousted from several counties, and
would soon hare been driven out Of great
part of the State. The individuals who wanted
office or the name Of having run for office count
for nothing in this matter. The voters were
bound to choose between votes thrown away
and votes to uphold the existing law, and they
chose deliberately. It is presumed that these
same leaders and voters may again posture be-
fore the people as the genuine advocates OF
temperance. But they are in fact the instru-
ments of the rum-shops. Their work and no
other will destroy lives and desolate homes,
wherever the traffic would have been stopped
under the present law, but will continue when
Democratic Legislature shall have done the
bidding Of the saloons.