The Monitor. [volume] (Woodstown, N.J.) 1884-1892, 1891-08-28
Whether ig~norantly or otherwise, the
MONITOR, the South jersey


Whether ignorantly or otherwise, the
prohibition party organ, does grave ln-
~instice when it asserts that the Republican
press ssdare not, and will not utter scarcely
a word" in condemnation. of the Dem
ocratic outrage of forcing upon the people
of Cumberland county a whiskey excise
commission. The Republican press of the
State, especially of Cumberland and other
South Jersey counties, have uttered vigor-
Gus protests against this high-handed DEM
ocratic outrage against the people of Cum
bsrland, but all their protesting bad no
effect upon the iend of the whiskey ele-
ment. And right here we will say to our
prohibition contemporary, that the hepuo-
lican press has become disguised with
being used as eats-paws to the third party
prohibitionists in fighting the rum power.
The fact is, and it is a fact beyond dispute
that the third party prohibitionists are re.
sponsible for the repeal of the local option
law, which Cumberland had adopted by an
overwhelming majority. They are also
responsible for the enactment of the Werts'
license law, and made it possible by their
votes in this county and Gloucester and
Salem for the enactment of the outrageous
excise law, which is fastening thesaloon
yoke on the people of Cumberland. The
third party prohibitionists are equally
guilty with the Democracy for thish high
handed outrage.-Ftneland Independent.
1t is an exceeding tiresome story and an
oft exploded one, too, this charging the
prohibition party with being responsible
for the liquor legislation of the state.
Better a great deal and with far more show
OF horse sense charge the Republican party
with being responsible for such a o
strous fraud as the present gubernatorial
incumbent, Leon Albeit, when they clearly
had it in their power to have elected Gen
eral Clinton B. Fisk in his stead. Whether
ignorantly or otherwise, the HHeload
great body of Republican kiekers of the
county OF Cumberland when it asserts that
''the fact is, and it is a fact beyond dispute
that the third party prohibitionists are re-
sponsible for the repeal Of the local option
Law which Cumberland had adopted by an
overwhelming majority" Either Bro. Ladd
or the local history of Cumberland
County is at fault in this assertion. II we
AaFC ~ RalE IL VIC IA4t 4AIEAOAiNHG
kickers of Cumberland County, and not
the prohibitionists, who elected Philip P.
Baker to the \. j, Senate in the stead Of
1. r. Nichols, ard thereby forced upon the
people the Werts law in the place Of
the local option law of a previous
legislature. This act was further clinehed
when these same kickers knocked out
Nichols a second time and elected ] L. Van
Syckel from the 1st assembly district.
If the third party prohibitionists, as Bro.
Ladd asserts, 'are equally guilty with the
democracy for this high handed outrage
Excise Commission bill) then George
Washington was responsible for Benedict
Arnold, an incident growing out Of the
effort of our revolutionary fathers to secure
the independence OF our country. Nay
more, the early church was also RESPONSE
Bile for the blood of its martyrs, for if
there had been no reformed aggressive
church of that day there would have been
no martyrs; and our Saviour even, by the
same parody of reasoning was responsible
for a ] udas I~scariot and Ponlius Plate
since had there been no Messiah there
would have been none of these. We think
Bro. Ladd attempts to prove too much in
the above with too little evidence.