New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-09-13
4 QUESTION OF DUTY.

noverful appeal will be made this year to
the consciences OF all sincere Temperance men
in New-York. They know what the party IN
mower has done. It's success was obtained by
| favor of the liquor interest, and has been used
as if the party were the mere tool OF thao III
terest. On the other hand, there is offered III
the resolution adopted by the Republican Con-
vention solution which will not crafty pro
hibitory extremists, but which is commenced
to the sober sense of those who hold it sacred
duty to secure practical results.
| The proposal is to grant local option to coun-
ties. cities and towns that the people OF eaCh
may decide for themselves whether the liquor
traffic within their borders shall be suppressed
or tolerated and then to impose a genera UaA
upon the traffic wherever the people decioe 10
permit it. Everywhere it will be restricted ny
such a license law as the Legislature may oeenl
wise. In the localities where the people them
selves want Prohibition it will be prohibited.
In Judging this plan it must be kept in mind
that prohibitory law, if enacted in this otate'
could not be enforced at all IN many Oh INC
larger cities. In this city, Brooklyn buiialo'
Rochester, Albany, and other cities, 1t would De
dead letter, a blot on the Statute-bcok Oecau'c
openly violated, and a disgrace to the state
Moreover, the example of utter failure TO en-
force the law in these cities would operate
powerfully to prevent its enforcement! III tDe
smaller cities and towns. Wherever the ma
iorty of the people are opposed to it, this enact
ment will be found absolutely worthless for
practical reform, a discredit to the state, ana a
serssus obstacle to the maintenance OF the au-
thOrity Of law.
This is a government of the people, by the
people. In every locality they have power 10
elect the officers upon whom the enforcement
Of the laws must depend. If the people OF any
CITY or town are hostile to a measure, and Will
NOT elect officers who will enforce it, that meas
ure,can do harm but no good. The best thing
that if is poesble to do, the only honorable thing
to the State and to the people themselves, is 70
place upon the voters the responsibility g de-
Gliding what restrictions they will impose Upon
the traffic in liquor. If they decide to prohibit
the same majority that so decides may be e1-
pected to find means to enforce the law 1t car
elect officials who are known to be willing anc
Trustworthy. If they decide not to prohibit
upon the majority will fall the consequences anc
the discrcdit and year by year their own In
torieence will enable them to judge whether
property is as valuable, society as pure, gov
eminent as economical, and order as well man
tanned. as in localities which exclude the traffic
entirely. Under the influence of such a per
petual comparison the stimulus to suppress the
traffic will be infinitely stronger than II III
suppression were attempted everywhere, but a
most points defeated by the refusal Of the people
to sustain it.
It is matter Of conscience for true temper
ance men whether this is not the best thing the!
have power to do in NewYork. If it Is, the!
are bound to do the best thing possible, and t.
waste no more time and strength in attempting
that which cannot be done. Other questions
there are on which the votes Of true Temperance
men are needed. They have no right to throw
away their influence on all other issues, Nationa
and State, in fighting for an impracticable thing
They have no right by their votes to give vic
tory to the party Of free rum and of corruption
in State government, because the majority o
the people will not now sustain or enforce
prohbtory law for the whole State.