The Somerset reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1868-1909, 1902-06-26
A Democratic Proposition.

The Lewiston Journal has entered into
the advocacy of resubmission with all
the whimsical fervor of new convert.
One would think If not familiar with the
fact, that the Journal was the original
discoverer and had patent right upon
resubmission of the prohibitory amend
ment in Maine; whereas the facts are, II
was discovered by Democratic State
Convention years ago and the changes
rung upon it by succeeding conventions
of that party, State and County, since
And that party has suff cred signal de-
feat in every case where it has been
made party measure. Moreover it has
been repeatedly introduced into the
State Legislature. 1t has been killed
every time it has been raised in Maine
and ought to be by this time a well
developed corpse.
Heretofore when any man or any party
has advocated resusmisson it has been
IN enmity to prohibition of the liquor
traffi :, and this is the legitimate object
at this time.
Those who originally favored resub-
mission did so with the purpose
to eliminate prohibition from the con-
stitution Of Maine first, and then from
the statutes. The enemies of prohibition
hail with Joy the advocacy of resubmis
sion by prohibitionists, count it signal
victory for license and in the direction
Of free rum. 1t is their measure and II
they can inveigle enough of those who
believe in prohibition to favor it, 1t is
their victory and will be used as an
argument against the prohibitory law.
Prohibition has the advantage now of
being a constitutional provision and
must remain such until by two-thirds
vote Of both branches Of legislature 1t is
submitted to the voters of the State. If
it is so submitted to the people and they
by majority vote decide that the pro.
hibitory amendment shall remain, 1t will
SO remain, but IL majority should
vote otherwise, then the prohibitery law
may be repealed by majority of both
branches Of the legislature like any other
law. Thus resubmission is the first step
necessary to the repeal Of the prohibitory
law, inaugurated by enemies OF that law
for the express purpose of its repeal, for
no sentimental purpose, and should be
SO regarded by friends Of the law.
These enemies of prohibition come to
friends and speciously say ave desire to
ascertain the wishes Of the people
whether this shall remain in the con-
stitutoD, the majority should rule, now
you have the advantage over US in that
We have got to get two-thirds vote of
the legislature to allow the people to
vote upon the amendment; be generous
with US and let us submit II to the people,
and, If we win we can secure repeal, by d
bare majority of each branch of the
legislature"
Can those who believe in prohibition,
now that they have this constitutional
and legal advantage, afford to give it
away by agreeing to re-submission?
Would any commander Of an army agree
TO yield up an intrenched picket line by
which he would have a two-thirds ad-
vantage over his attacking foe? We be-
heye not, unless that military command
er is intoxicated or demented. Neither
90 we believe 1t Is reasonable to expect
friends Of prohibition to give up this
two-thirds advantage they now have. It
would be neither good business nor good
politics as we view the situation. The
light should be made on the intrenched
picket line on the start.