The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1891-08-27
Some Pointed Reflections on Local
Option.
STANTON, VA, Aug "A, 1891.

ETAUSTON, VA. Aug "a, 1871.
Editor, fthe Valley Ffrginiesn:
To write now about tile late local option con-
test in this city is by no means to discuss set
tied question: or to revive a dead issue. For one
party to the contest imported into it an issue
which so far from being dead one, is likely
upon their principles to become question
fraught with more danger to the country than
intemperance, with all its admitted evils
There were two questions intimately connect
ed with the recent election, although only one
of them was really and legitimately involved in
it.
The first was-ls it the duty of every good
citizen and of every good christian to combat
the evils of drunkenness? But this is not in
reality an omen question at all For there can
be no doubt whatever that the abuse OF strong
drink is gigantic evil, or that every christian
is bound to do what he can to suppress it. me
wet and the dry party were at bottom in perfect
accord on this point
THE other question was--Which of two legal
remedies for this admitted evil, between winch
the law allows every community choice, Is the
most effective? This was clearly the only legitl-
mate Issue in the election-the only one in fact
which the law allows to be brought to the polls.
but in their honest Geai the dry party sought
10 strengthen their cause by appealing almost
exclusively to religious principle. Their argu-
n ents and ,3ersuasions were brought to bear
chiefly upon the question whether a man conld
be a good christian il he voted the wet ticket
They forgot that his christian consistency de-
uended upon whether or not he honestly be-
I;eyat that he was working against intemper-
auce. Ti;ey were SO thoroughly convinced that
their relnedy WAS the only effective one, that
they came tiiipk that to vote for any other
remedy was the same thing as voting TO per-
.'beA-i
ed that if a man differed with chem as to the
best legal means of combating a sin, he WAS
lust as bad as the man who committed the sin
He was working against God and Home. and on
the side of the devil. IN short, they avowed
openly that there were no politics IN the 1ssue
ana that consequently it was moral and relig
i0us question.
1t was lust here that. they made dangerous
mistake. They put in the edge of ; wedge which
If once driven in to the head. would upheage
the whole country--which would begin hy.dlling
it with religious dissension and turmoil, and
end by destroying the last vestige of its religi-
Gus liberty They persistently avowed that
christian principle obliged a man to vote
against license. The answer given them was:
mo; so far religion bears on the matter, it
only teaches that no christian ought to try to
perpetuate intemperance. But not doing
that SO far from it, am voting for what
honestly believe 30 be the best legal remedy
against intemperanee. | am deciding between
two legal methods, the choice OF which the lazy
leaves to be decided at the polls; and, therefore,
am voting on political issue. | have a right
to force my political convictions you by q
majority vote, if can get it; but have no right
to roroe my religious beliefs you at the polls
II Soa insist that this ID d religious question,
ta ke it away from the polls, and carry it TO the
pulpit where it belongs.
NBut the other party persisted in saying mo. |
my conscience requires me to vote against Ii |
cenSe, and il | cannot make your conscience /
agree with mine in any other way, | will do it |
at the polls. ] will try TO get majority, SO as
to compel you to 40, not what Bot thinS, but /
what think to be your duty christian
Now the truth is that in this, as in many other |
questions. the domains of political ana of re
ligious duty so overlap each other that it is hard
to draw clear line between them But the I
mista Ike the dry party made was first in de-
at all, but chiefly, il not wholly, or religious +
duty and then in carrying what was declared TO |
be,a distinctly religious question to the polls for
decision. They sought to establish precedent |
which is plainly flaught with the gravest peril I
For once admit that majority has a right to |
decide question OF conscience, and carry out
this idea to its legitimate and inevitable conse-
liberty in America. For what is to hinder a |
Catholic majority from going some DAY TO the I
faith to be protested in the United States, or a
Protestant majority from outlawing the Catho t
lie Church? What is to prevent the filling OF the
whole land with that acrimony OF spirit of /
which the Introduction of religion at the polls I
mas just given US so bitter a foretaste?
II local option lee what the wet party contend
ed that it was, political ssne the constitution
allows it to be decided at The polls i it be what /
the dry party commended, question of CON
science and religious duty, the constitution most
expressly and most wisely forbids it to be taken
to the polls. II the advocates Of prohibition or
of local option propose. in order 10 save few
thousand people from drunkenness, to violate
the constitution by involving sixty millions of
people in religious dissension and turmoil let
them come out and say Let the world know
Just where they stand For if what was seen
and heard i'll stanton last week is a fair indi-
cation of the position Of their party throughout
the country at large, it is time to warn the cOun
try that the question involved is not the increase
or decrease of drunkenness but the personal,
the religious, and the constitutional liberty of
the American people. G. }. A.