New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-06-22
SEED AND FRUIT.

Three years ago 1918 citizens Of Rhode
Island voted for Prohibition and only 9,23O
against Now, with larger suffrage, the vote
against Prohibition is nearly three tO one' ana
28,44O voted to cast IL out OF the Constitution,
against only $3.50 to retain it. Here 1t Is OBJ
yious that large number OF voters have
changed from one side 10 the other. They voted
for Prohibition three years ago, and after
reasonable trial of it they now vote against it.
The present Prohibition vote, II must bo as
sumed, has been drawn In part from the 1900
new voters, and allowing nearly 5000 for
these, there would remain less than 1000 OF
the former voters who supported Prohibition in
1889, against ID, 600 who voted for it in 1856
Three years experience has satisfied more than
half of those who favored Prohibition before
it had been tried in Rhode Island that il is not
a wise policy,
1t is only Just to the Prohibitonists to OBJ
serve that the experience which has brought
about change so decisive has not been con-
fined to the State Of Rhode Island. tndoubt-
edly the results Of Prohibition in other States
during these same years have strongly intiu-
enced the minds Of voters also. Nor can 1t be
denied that the conduct Of Prohibition leaders
in nearly all the States has been such as to
arouse intense opposition on the part Of many
who sincerely supported Prohibition few years
ago. When Mr.. St. John became paid tool
Of the Democratic party in 1884 1t was by
many honest Prohibitionists supposed that he
did not represent the leading and influential MON
of that party and that his bitter assaults upon
the Republican cause were ebullitionS Of private
feeling because Of tho false position in which he
had been placed. But since that time the CON
duct of other Prohibition leaders in great num-
bcr and in many States, has been calculated tn
convince sincere voters that thcso professional
Prohibitionists are in fact seeking, not the pro-
motion of the cause Of temperance but per-
sonal ends or the qualification of personal ami
mostly. For instance, when these leaders de-
Iibcrately conspired to throw the control Of tho
State Of New-Jersoy into the hands Of tho
Democrats and tho saloonkncpcrs, directly after
a most judicious and benefccnt temperance law
had been adopted by Republican votes in the
Legislature, and had enabled several counties
Of tho State to get rid Of the liquor traffic en-
tirely, it was felt by honest Prohibition voters
wherever the facts were known that tho So
called Prohbitionists in New jersey wero more
anxious, for reasons Of their own, to help the
Democratic party than to promote tho cause of
temperance.
The results in PENNSYLVANIA and Rhode Island
are natural fruits from such seed. Having
taken great pains to insult and offend a large
majority Of tho voters who sincerely caro- for
the temperance cause the Prohibition leaders
find this year that those voters have concluded
to let them alone severely. One result will be
that tho sO-called Third party will cut a less
significant figure in public affairs hereafter
Another and more important result is that the
most intelligent and conscientious friends OF
temperance will be tho better abIo TO conCcn-
trato their efforts upon wiso and iudiciou,
| nolicy.