Washington sentinel., 1899-06-24

puerility which almost precludes their
serious discussion by men OF average
intellig ence.
That was not always so. What
struck prohibition and when did
it take placer We remember that,
until the prohibitionists were de-
feated in March, 1891, they were
all powerful 1t was the dele t OF
their pet measure, their Five Com
mission Bill, that gave them their
death blow. And it was the
editor OF the WASHINGTON SENTI-
MEL that struck, or prepared, the
blow. 1t would be cowardice to
conceal this any longer.
Ever since 1878 the eading
Prohibitiouists had been at work
in Congress to get a national in
vestigation Of the liquor traffic.
Every year they appeared before
the Congressional Committees in
favor OF their bill. Mr.. Schade,
the editor Of the SENTINEL, has
been their sole opponent on these
occasions. Seven or eight times
the bill has passed the Senate, but
we have every time defeated it.
When the Congress of 1890 as
sembled and when Speaker Reed
appointed a picked prohibition
Committee on Liquor Traffic, COM
posed of 10 Prohibitionists e
Republicans and 3 Democrats)
and but one personal liberty Dem
ocrat, Quinn, of New York, the
prohibitionists thought they would
at last have their pet measure
passed. We feared ourselves that
we would have to yield, especially
as the United States Brewers As
sociation, probably believing the
passage OF the bill already fixed
tact, had actually sent circulars to
every member Of Congress, and
even petitioned Congress lin a
petition introduced by Mr.. Quinn
at the request OF Congressman
Fitch, the brewers representative
in Congress) to have commission
Of nine appointed to do the same
thing which the Prohibitonists de-
sired, to wit, to investigate the
liquor traffic.
On the I3th OF February, 1890,
the above named Messrs. Powell
and Stearns, accompanied by Mrs.
Ellen Foster, of Iowa, Mrs. Bitten
bender, the leading representative
Of Miss Willards w. c. T. u, and
other prohibition ladies and gen
tlemen, met before the House
Liquor Traffic Committee. AS
| usual, the writer was the only one
who appeared in opposition.
Messrs. Powell and Stearns and
Mrs. Foster and Mrs. Bittenbender
made long arguments in favor of
the Commission. They were read
/ lily assisted with all sorts Of friend dly
advice by the members ofthe com
mittee in making as favorable a
showing as possible. OF course all
present felt pleased and hopeful
except the writer Nevertheless
he did not give up in despair.
1t is true, it was a terrible blow
when our own friends, the United
States Brewers Association j joined
the Prohibitionists IN favor OF the
Commission bill, introduced by a
leading representative OF the
brewers, Mr.. Fitch, and when the
brewers sent out petitions to every
Congressman. which frightened
even the only member Of the
Liquor Traffic Committee in favor
Of personal liberty. Mr., Quinn,
whom we had selected to present
the minority report to the Commit
tee. He refused to present the
report, because il might injure him
in his city OF New York, as all the
big New York brewers had petit
toned for a Commission Of Nine.
Not until he had sent our report
(every word written by Louis
Schade, though unknown to them)
to the Brewers Literary Bureau.
and their consent was received, did
he agree to present the report,
without which the ProhiOitIonis-s
having then no opposition, would
undoubtedly have been success
full.
That was hard struggle Tor
liberty, the hardest we have had
yet we were success al.
On the fourth Of March 1891,
Speaker Reed recognized the
Chairman Of the Liquor Traffic
Committee and the latter called
the bill up.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken on the
motion to suspend the rules and
pass the bill. And it was decided
in the negative-yeas, 81, nays,