Herald and tribune. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1869-current, 1895-11-20
THE W. G. T. U. AND IT'S CRITICS.

II w. C.. 7. U. AND IT'S CRITICS.
We don't remember that the Wo-
mems Christian Temperance Union
ever held a national convention that
did not arouse the solemn protest of old
party papers. If 1t was not one thing
it was another that called forth criti-
cism and sad prophecies of immediate
dissolution. And there have always
been ~churchly editors that had their
apprehensions aroused whenever the
dailies began to criticize, and who join
ed in with their protestations. This
generally lasts about three'weeks after
the convention, and the union then
continues its successful course till the
next year, when a new grievance is
found, and the old one forgotten.
When woman suffrage was %espoused,
the solemn warnings were. many. When
the Prohibition party was %espouSed, the
adjurations were equally deep and
soulful. When a campaign for social
purity began, the watchful old party
editors saw new storms brewing. So it
has gone. So it goes now.
The grievance of the old party edi-
tors this year is the action of the recent
convention in recommending q union
of reformers on the Staten Island basis.
The resolution on the subject was as
follows:
whereas, An effort to secure the pc.
litical union of the reform forces of the
nation against the allied evils of in
justice and intemperance has resulted
in the acceptance, by large numbers of
earnest men and women in various
parts of the country, of what is known
as the Staten Island basis of union
therefore,
Resolved, That the object of such
efforts is one that we most earnestly
indorse, and we hereby recommend the
Staten Island basis as one upon which
the reform forces of the nation may
honorably and worthily unite for the
campaign of 1896"
The adoption of this resolution caused
hardly a ripple in the convention.
There was not a dissenting vote. One
Eastern delegate questioned whether
the financial plank in the Staten Island
basis of union accorded with the views
of the union, and Miss Willard re.
sponded sensibly enough that 1--WE shall
probably never subscribe TO q political
platform all of whose planks are ex.
actly what we would have made
them" Every one admits that this is
so when it comes to ones own,political
course. No man expects his party
platform to be an exact production of
his own individual views. If every
Prohibitionist, for instance, declared
that he would not help in a contest
against the license parties if there was
anything in the platform he objected
to, does not follow. What the union
committed itself to was the union of re.
form forces. and the Staten Island
basis was recognized as one upon which
there could be an honorable union.
Why not, when that basis contains the
two prime objects of the w. C. T. US,
work, namely, Prohibition and Wo.
nan Suffrage?
The Northwestern Christian Advo.
cate says:
We are sure that the free coinage OF
silver is not a highway to Prohibition.
We do not see how a single tax on land
suggests a path to the extinction of the
liquor evil. While there are great evils
relating to the labor question, we dc
not %preceive how Government posses
sion and control of railway and tele
graph lines can affect the consumption
of whisky and beef. 1t is difficult tt
realize how q Government that now
licenses and protects the manufacture
and sale of whisky will become a mis-,
sionary and reformer by its ownership
and management of the instruments Of
transportation and news"
The answer to all this is that q union
ofIeform forces on a Prohibition basi,
will advance Prohibition, whether each
particular item in the platform is or il
not specifically adapted to that end
and it is this union of forces, mo- each
particular item in the proposed basis
that the union indorses. The Intel
Ocean, of Chicago, says similarly
ave fail to see any logical connection
between the coinage question and the
object for which the w. c. I. y. was
formed" Perhaps so; but we can see
a very clear logical connection between
a union of reform forces on a Prohibi
ton basis, and the object for which the
union was formed.
But the truth is, most of the criti
cisms of the w. G. T. u, bothnow and
heretofore, proceed on the assumption
that the Union has but one object
namely, Prohibition. The W. c. I. U,
holds nc less firmly to that object than
il did at the start: but has broader aims
today than II had at first. 1t has been
growing and developing, To-, these
many years: and today its purpose.
whatever might have been the case al
first, is not included in the word Prohi'