The Dickinson press., 1913-02-15

each one parsue fts own course aud we
have amore amiable state Of condition.
AT the beginning Of the session of
this legislature resolution was intro
duced BY the N. E. conference asking
earnestly the senate and the house not
to take any steps in regard to the lniti-
atfve and referendum as they are oppos-
ed to it In regard to any constitutional
amendments.
l would like to ask, 10 the state en-
croachine upon the rights and activity
Of the N. E. churchi II It giants the
people Of this state the privilege of in
itiatins laws, does it interfere with the
work Of the church. and if SO. in which
way! Does the M. E.. church ask the
legislature of this state to follow out it's
instructions! Are they to do our think.
ing, and do they require the majority of
this body to accept their hand me down
opinions. or shall we assert our own in
dividuality? I think not.
Are the promoters Of this resolution
in thorough sympathy with the move-
ments of modern times. or are they
hopelessly hitched to the tail.e of the
cart of the idea of progressiveness? l
ask to know.
l think if the people Of this state or
any other state ask for a change in the
way of enacting laws and initiating
them. for which they honestly think
the time is ripe. they ought to be given
this right, as they should have voice
directly in the governmental affairs of
this state and nation, for they are sup
porting and maintaining it. I mean
they are paying taxes, and that is more
than the M. E. church does at the pres
ent time.
l have no quarrel with this particular
church or any other one. 1t is their res
olution which, have attacked and tried
to show its Inconsistencies.
We are confronted with the same sit
uation, after we have listened to the
arguments of some lawyers, who are
very much opposed to the initiative and
referendum. and you have to draw your
own conclusions. do not see why they
should struggle with desperate efforts to
check this movement: it certainly will
not interfere with their work. On the
contrary it will probably increase it
and give them more to do.
Looking at this question from a moral
standpoint, the whole affair turns on
the hinges of resubmission. That is
where the fight comes in, fought by the
churches. W. C. T. U., prohibitionists
and few others. Now do you really
think that if the initiative and referen-
dunn is adopted and the people can legis-
late direct. that it will lower the stand
ard Of morals, sobriety. honor and integ-
rity of our whole state? You must Ger
tainly realize that in states VIII ere prohi-
bition is not ruling, the people are frugal,
virtuous and decent, the standard of in
telligence on the same level, as in our
own state. Is the standard of morality
Of a state, nation. or perhaps of the
whole human race measured by the very
small percentage of those who are not
strong enough to subdue their passions,
or by the great masses of mankind. who
are doing their share for the betterment
of conditions? know there are dull,
phlegmatic beings. with blood not
warmer than dishwater, who are sober
and virtuous citizens because they have
never felt the force of temptation, and
how can such people understand and
judge human nature at all?
Are we really afraid that in the 1u-
ture our people will not be able to take
care of themselves if prohibition is
lifted? 1t seems utterly absurd to advo-
cate this policy, which not only fails to
promote Temperance, but breeds law
lessness, multiplies hypoerites, liars