The Monitor-register., 1897-06-04
THE REPLY,
William Penn on the Duty of Citi.
zens to Vote.


a concern which Edward H. Magill
presented on May 10 to the Yearly Meet.
ing of Friends. In the Ledger to day
Mr.. Magill, in an interesting way, and
the liquor traffic in accordance with the
writing which he read to the large
assemblage of Friends. His printed
views about intemperance are correct
except as to the remedy he proposes for
the evils issuing from the open saloon.
Professor Magil's proposition is that
where one or the other of the two great
political parties does not nominate
candidates opposed to the traffic in
intoxicants Friends should refuse to vote.
As a remedy this would probably answer.
if the election officers counted the citizens
who had not voted, and made their
returns to that effect. Such Ia not the
case, however, and therefore the Friends
would not be kno wn or recognized as a
governmental factor, but, on the other
hand, thei r absence from the ballot box
would make them silent and consenting
partners to the business which the Society
condemns.
Samuel Janney, in his history of the
Society of Friends, tells us that in 1851
William Penn took IN active part in the
Parliamentary election of that year,
using his influence to secure the election
Of Algernon Sydney, a staunch advocate
of popular rights. In that same year
Friends Meeting said to the electors:
"We desire that all Friends who are in
capacity may appear and make what good
interest they can in this election for
Parliament men, for sober, dircreet and
moderate men," In addressing his
coreligionists Penn also said: "If by
neglect of this singular opportunity we
desert ourselves and forsake Il own
mercies, we must expect to be left of
God and good men too. = n II We
miscarry it will be our own fault; we
have nobody else to blame.".
1t will be seen by this that the great
founder of this Commonwealth under
stood the Importance of voting to secure
at that time the liberty of Friends by
electing "sober, discreet and moderate
men," The vote is as important now as
it was in 1851, as was shown recently
in Delaware %county's License Court,
when Judge Clayton said that the
petition of the poorest voter in favor of a
license ontweighed the rem onstrance of
the millionaire n%on.voter. The Judge,
like all other men in authority, recognized
the power which placed him in office
namely, the active, aggressive voters.
If, as Professor Magill suggests, all
the religious bodies would forget their
denominationai differences and adopt
the policy of %absenting themselves from
the ballot box, because the candidates of
the two great parties were not opposed to
the license system, their would be no
difference in the result. The Friends in
1851, many of them, said: "If the virtuous
and intelligent portion of the community
left the elections in the hands of the
profigate and ignorant, a representative
| government may prove to be more
offensive thar an absolute monarchy"
This same reasoning holds good to-day.
/ Refusing to vote would leave the liquor
interest a free field and all the favors.
On the other hand, did all the Christian
voters unite in one party, without regard
to the party name, say in November next,
there would come an awakening Of Sleep
ing common sense on the subject that
would prove a social and political revolu-
tion such as the country or world has
never seen.
The refusal of Friends to vote would at
first excite the mirth and then the ridi
Guile of the various liquor leagues, but
their act of concentrating in one political
party would, in several counties of this
State, upset the calculations of the
political leaders. and then would
inevitably follow the prejudice which Mr..
Msgill so fears. Then the Society of
Friends would either have to give up
the contest or continue a vigorous opposi
ton as they did when the question CT
negro slavery was before the people. To
my mind there has been no agent so
powerful, so filled with good results, so
useful in elevating humanity in the past,
as the casting of the ballot intellige ntly
aud conscientiously. To-day the saloon
manipulates the franchise, and, while
personally in harmony with the teachings
of the Society of friends, | would
individually consider it a willful de relic
tion of Christian duty and a %relinquish-
ment Of my rights as a citizen if 1
deliberately permitted the liquor traffic
to silence my vote on election day
because the two leading political parties
refused to nominate candidates opposed
TO the business which furnishes the
election sinews. The word "Prohibition,"
as applied to a party, probably has
awakened prejudice, but that cannot be
helped. If the pan of ca campaign proposed
By Edward FL. Magill should be adopted,
prejudice would ultimately appear, active
and aggressive. To parody Shakespeare:
''The ballot is the thing"
JAMES z. DAIJFy