Democratic messenger., 1889-06-22
Prohibitions Waterloo.
TEMPERANCE PEOPLE VOTE
AGAINST 1T.
Buried Under 100. 900 Majority
PRESS COMMENTS.

EnG00 OOm I'M GN I'D.
The advocates Of constitu-
ional prohibition met with a
regular Waterloo yesterday in
both city and State. This city
does not poll more than half
the vote for the amendment
that was conceded to it by its
opponents. and not one-fourth
OF what was claimed and con-
fdently expected by its sup
porters who should have been
best advised Of the situation.
In fact, twas not a contest at all;
it was a landslide that swept
everything before it, and the
large number Of the most in
telligent and sober citizens
who attended the polls with
out persuasion or drumming.
proves that the great bulk OF
the friends Of temperance vol
unfairly opposed constitutional
prohibition. Only by the action
Of such citizens could Philadel-
phia have rolled up the amaz-
ing majority Of $4,000 against
the prohibitory amendment.
But the rural districts were
the hope of the earnest sup
porters Of prohibition. In this
expectation the supporters Of
the amendment have been
grievously disappointed. Ev-
cry county classed as close or
doubtful swept into the anti
prohibition column one-half
the counties positively claimed
for the amendment have given
decided majorities against it
the counties conceded against
the amendment have gcner-
ally doubled or trebbled their
expected vote, while the pro-
hibition strongholds have fall
en- down to practically nomi-
nal majorities. A majority Of
the counties which voted in
favor Of local option more
than fifteen years ago. when
there was less positive temper
ance sentiment in the State
than there is to-day, have de-
clared with emphasis against
the experiment Of prohibition
by constitutional amendment !;
and thus the prohibitory move
ment has suffered on every
side because Of the loss Of
the major portion Of the sin
cerc temperance vote of every
section of the State. 1t is a
Waterloo for temperance or in
any measure a revulsion
against public sobricty.
This emphatic expression
of the people OF Pennsylvania
against constitutional prohibi-
ton. must not be misintcrprc-
ted as a backward step from
the severe regulation Of the
liquor traffic statute. The pro-
hibitory amendment was sub
mitted under a combination
ofadversc circumstances. Had
not the present high license
system been adopted by the
same Legislature that first
passed the amendment, and
thus given the people a full
year of trial Of a greatly i'm
proved but still imperfect L.
cense law, there would have
been tens Of thousands Of
votes cast for prohibition yes
terday which were cast against
it. The long trial of high
license the admitted beneh-
cient results which followed
it, and the judgment OF sever
al New England States which
had experimental in prohibi-
ton. and voted against it with
in the last few weeks. were
grave obstacles in the way Of
prohibition in Pennsylvania {;
and to these must be added
the general unwillingness Of
the conservative voters of the
State to make the experiment
by constitutional amendment
that could not be revised. when
it might be as well done by
statute.
So far from Pennsylvania
taking a step backward on the
great question Of public So
briefly, the verdict yesterday
was practically won by those
who took the field for a better
temperance theory than prohi-
bition. They were not enthus-
iastic theorists, but intelligent.
practical philianthropists, from
the pulpit. from the ranks Of