The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1902-04-30
ARTHUR ROPES, General Editor
THE CANDIDATES AND THE
LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

governorship it might be well - it
would be necessary-to consider it Sc
riously. The recent introduction of
the question from the Proctor side of
the contest is simply political trick
to divert public attention from the
lines along which the canvass had
cen proceeding. 1t is diversion to
escape impending defeat. The license
and local option newspapers have sud-
denly conceived wonderful interest
in prohibition and are exhibiting
suspicious degree of solicitude for the
soundness of candidates on the policy
of prohibition. Clamoring for years
for public hearing on their favorite
issue, license and local option, when
a candidate for the governorship gets
some of his sympathizers to invite him
to become a candidate with license of
the liquor traffic for his platform,
these newspapers turn from the
prophet of their faith to embrace an
other who avows himself to be of "the
Mr.. Proctor's avowal of his position
on prohibition may mean something,
or it may mean nothing, or it may be
only bid for the prohibition vote.
General Mccullough declares that if
he should be placed i'll an official po-
sition requiring him to act on legisla-
ton strengthening or modifying the
existing prohibitory law in any regard
he would approve the measure, if en-
acted in accordance with the require
ments of the constitution. He recog-
nizes the fact THAT prohibition has
been the policy of Vermont for half
century and will continue to be-" as,
in his opinion, cit has the approval
of the majority of the people of the
State. This question being the sub
ject of constant discussion by the
press and among the voters of the sew
eral towns, their Judgment in the mat
ter "cannot fail to be reflected III the
complexion of the representatives
chosen to the General Assembly,"
General McCullough's position is
the only one Governor having a
right understanding of the principles
of the government of Vermont and the
duties of its chief executive office can
take. 1t is the position held by the
Governor who approved the original
prohibitory law, and by every Gov
ernor elected since its enactment, in
respect Of this or any other kind of
legislation. This is all there is of the
matter Mccullough is on solid, con.
stitutional ground. The hullabaloo
the Proctor local option, high license
organs are making over the dictum of
General Mccullough is all the rank
est kind of demagoguery. In this
emergency they don't care "conti-
mental dam whether license is vot-
ed up or voted down, whether prohi-
bition is maintained as the policy of
the State or whether any combination
of license-high or low-with local
option is substituted for the existing
system. The issue is purely and
entirely anything to beat McCul-
Tough" The intent and purpose of
all their outcry is to raise a dust, OBJ
scure the real issue and fool the vot-
ers into turning from their natural
choice for Governor to the candidate
who has been persuaded for some sim
lister purpose to recall his original
conclusion, to go back ON the assur-
ances given his best and truest friends,
and to enter the canvass to defeat
General Mccullough. The louder
their outcry, the fiercer their declama-
ion, the clearer their purpose appears.
The question presented is simply
the DID, old one of the sovereignty of
the people, to wit;
Ought the Governor, by the exer-
else of the veto power, to prevent the
enactment of a law regulating the
liquor traffic, against the wish of the
people of the State, as expressed by
the General Assembly?
The presumption of course is that |
the General Assembly has been law
fully elected and organized, that the
proposed law is constitutional in its
provisions, and that its enactment is
not vitiated by any form of irregular
ity in legislative procedure.
If Mr., Clement were elected Gov
ernor, would he veto "any constitu.
tional measure strengthening or mod
flying the existing statute in any re-
gard?" If yes, how would he justify
the veto?
If Mr. Proctor were elected Govern
or, would he veto a license measure?
If yes, on what ground? What would |
be the moral force and effect of the
prohibitory law after such an exercise
of "the one man power?"
If the legislative majority were in
any just sense the expression of the
wish of the people, the prohibitionists
would justly denounoe Gov. Clement
for vetoing "any constitutional meas