St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-04-05
Iowa's Representatives Say
the Prohibition Law Will
Stand.
Republicans Control the SEN
ate, and Can Block the
Democratic Game.
Public ISentiment May Force
the Enactment Of a Lii
cense Law.
Fallacies of MeKinley's Sugar
Schedules Exposed by an
Expert.

WASHINGTON, April 4.-The Post has
been interviewing the Iowa senators
and representatives on the probability
of the repeal or modification of the Iowa
prohibition law, and will print their
statements in the morning. The result
was substantially uniform expression
of belief that the law would stand unre-
pealed. Senator Allison was very busy
when interviewed, and simply said:
"In my opinion it will not be repealed" !"
Senator Wilson thought the law would
not be repealed, because there would
not be votes enough. The repeal, he
said. could not carry in the senate and
besides the Republicans in the house,
one man who voted with the Democrats
usually would vote against the repeal.
The senator thought the majority of the
signers of the call for a conference
had never been supporters of
prohibition. Il am in favor"
he continued, ''Of maintaining the
present system of prohibition. l fav-
Ored its adoption. | am quite sure
Though do not know very much about
it) that the new movement does not rep
resent the dominant Republican senti-
ment in Iowa. If the question were
submitted as before, instead of $4,000
majority there would be nearer $4,000
majority. Prohibition is the forceful
cause of
The Decrease of Crime
in Iowa. He did not believe the new
movement would result in any change
in the system. Representative Dolli-
yer, j. ii. Sweeney, Lacy, Flick, Kerr,
Struble and Conger all expressed the
opinion that the law would not be re-
pealed or modified. In their interviews
they very generally expressed the
opinion that the law had been beneficial
and that the decrease in crime and the
consequent lessening of expenses for
criminal and eleemosynary institutions
was largely due to the prohibitory law.
The prohibition sentiment, majority
of them thought, was as strong as
ever, and several OF the gentlemen
named ascribed the result of the
last election to the railroad ques-
ton more than to anything else.
Representative Reed agreed with his
old colleagues as to the improbabiltiyof
the laws repeal, and that it had de-
creased crime. but said: "The senti-
ment was doubtless more favorable to
prohibition a few years ago than it is
now." He also attributed the election
of Gov. Boies last year in part to the
railroad question, but thought that
he would have been defeated but for
prohibition. He favored the enforce
ment of the law rather than license.
"Still think" said he, 1--WE shall have
to come to license ultimately unless
there is change in public sentiment"
A strong expression of views on the
other side was given when Congressman
Hayes, the
Only Democrat From Iowa
and an avowed anti-prohibitionist, was
interviewed. He said: II have not
been in the state for months and don't
know that | am abreast of the present
sentiment, but as the Republicans
control the senate and can block
the house l think nothing
will be done. I don't think
the law will be repealed. But it is pos
sible that some of the Republicans may.
through public sentiment, JOIN the
Democrats in enacting a stringent Ii
cense law" sis the present prohibit
ory system sustained by majority of
the peOple?" "Most assuredly not, and
never was. A great many were
willing to give it trial, which they did,
and its absolute failure to accomplish
any good and the positive evil following
from it have caused the feeling to be
largely against it," He thought other
questions helped to determine the cleo
tiOn last fall. especially the tariff.