The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-11
CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION.
December Z, 1895.

SAN FRANCISCO, CAL, Dec, D, 1898.
To the Editor of the San Francisco CGU-DEAR
SIR: My attention has been called to the Ma
tional amendment plan for the abolition of the
liquor traffic and l heartily approve of the
same 1t is very far-reaching in its conse-
quences, and, if adopted by Prohibitionists,
may result in the immediate disintegration of
the Prohibition party. Thet party has been
unsuccessful in uniting the friends of prohibit
ton, and has utterly failed in securing the
enactment of restrictive legislation. For a
score of years it has waged futile warfare
against King Alcohol, and after each defeat its
leaders have encouraged the rank and file OF
the party with glowing promises which have
never been fulfilled. They have iterated and
reiterated the statement during this period
that there could not be any prohibition with
out Prohibition party, and yet the stubborn
fact remains that every restrictive measure
which exists, whether CONSTITUTIONAL leglsla-
tive, or embodied in q local ordinance, has
been secured by non-partisan prohibition
lists. Let me instance the constitutional pro-
hibition of Maine, Kansas and the Dakotas,
and other forms of prohibition in a majority OF
the States of the Union, as proof OF this asser-
ton. Nor do / say this in any spirit of antag-
onism to the Prohibition party, for at the last
three general elections l have voted tor the
head of its ticket. / did so, however, purely
upon principle, and with full consciousness
OF the hopelessness OF the struggle along the
lines of Independent political effc-..
The present plan will, doubtless, receive the
unqualified support of all genuine Prohib-
itionists, whether third party men or members
of the old party. 1t is simple, practical and is
absolutely devoid of any feature which will
give rise to honest difference of opinion among
the advocates of restrictive legislation for the
liquor traffic. 1t will receive the support OF
ali true friends of the principle it embodies,
and /, for one, Will have no confidence in the
sincerity of any avowed ProhlbltloniSt,
whether he be partisan or non-partisan,
who declines under any pretext to indorse 1T.
The argument that an amendment without q
party back of it will be imperative is entirely
specious. 1t is better to have prohibition legis-
lation without prohibition party than to
have prohibition party without prohibition
legislation. Besides, constitutional amend
ment will be enforced, even though its enemies
be in power. Our own State constitution has
been sustained by public officials who. in the
large majority OF cases. were bitterly opposed
to its adoption. Nearly all the lawyers in the
State fought ii, and yet the Judiciary have &C
cepted it in good faith and have scrupulously
upheld its provisions.
amendment to the Federal constitution is to
doubt the success of our institutions, Tor, II
there is any power in this Nation which can
defy the will of an overwhelming majority of
the people, as expressed in the organic law of
the Nation, our Government isle colossal fail
ure and should cease to exist.
Let all sincere advocates OF prohibition unite
in piling up such petitions for the amendment
that its adoption by 1900 will be assured.
E. A. GIRvIN, 305 Larkin street.