Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1914-08-16

THE PARTIES AND PROHIBITION.

The Northern Idaho News Democratic paper is la
boring hard to make appear that there essential
difference between the Republican and Democratic plat
forms upon the liquor question: the northern paper an
advocate of the VETS being anxious to make appear that
the Democrats are less dry than the Republicans.
Divested of all surplus words both platforms, how
declare for the submission to the of the
OF constitutional amendment prohibiting the manufac
ure and sale of intoxicating liquor and beyond that both
might well have kept still just the Democrats did
1t is true that the Republican platform says that IF
such amendment not submitted then favors statewide
prohibition by legislative enactment but in view of the
declaration Of all the political parties that declaration has
more effect than if it not made.
And matter of fact, it only made for the pur-
pose of forcing favorable action upon the amendment and
not because of friendship for statewide prohibition On
the contrary it indicates hostility to statewide prohbi
ton at least during the tendency of constitutional
amendment Reduced to plain language the Republican
platform, In effect says this:
the submission
statewide prohibition statutory enactment but If we cannot g the ne
ar ~V for % @ 'n So favor S ,ns enactment 1
will not enact statute to be force while the amendment beng SUBMITTED
o the people
Now, that is the Republican attitude and there is no
need to attempt to deceive either the vets the ds by
attempting to make believe that any other attitude
taken.
The Democratic attitude is exactly the same, assum
ing that the amendment will be submitted, which
denies.
The Progressves go further and declare in favor of
submitting the amendment, the as the other two
parties do and then in addition they declare in favor of
statewide prohibition by law of the legislature ndepend
emily Of whether the constitutional amendment is sub
mitted and independently of whether not such amend
ment is adopted.
The Republicans took view of the liquor question
and that that is better to submit the question the
people by way Of constitutional amendment and then
that DONE it is better not to compcate the situation
the risk of antagOnisms through enforcement or
forcement of statewide prohbtory laws, other
stringent liquor legislation during the two years that the
amendment is pending The Democrats took exactly the
position saying it, however, in fewer and palmer
words.
The Progressves took the position that there is de-
mand not alone for the submission of constitutional
amendment, but for actual prohibition and conse-
quence they declared for boh and they should control
the legislature if enough of them elected to make
majority with other individual prohbtionists in the next
legislature, law will be enacted making the whole state
dry during the two years while the amendment pending
The failure of the Democrats and the Republicans to
promise what action if any, they would take during the
two years while the amendment is pending before the
people, has given the of the state and the home
rulers their chance to ugge the legislative tickets That
is why such effort is being made here in Boise by
tain business men, advocating wet and wideopen town.
to dictate the legislative tickets upon both the Republican
and Democratic tickets
They hope thereby to be able to elect enough members
of the legislature to prevent the statewide enactment
promised by the Progressve the least of their
pshments. AS the greatest of their accomplishments
they hope to legislative enactment providing for
home rule wet towns throughout the state while the
prohibition amendment pending This they do with
out violating single pledge of either the Republican or
Democratic platforms and that is why these business men
profuse in their pledges that their candidates. if
nominated and elected will not violate single platform
pledge of their respective parties
This believe fair square and correct statement