Evening star., 1916-02-17
Verbal Intemperance.

vCl Odl 4utCIupClduCV.
1t should be possible for Washing
tonians to discuss issues of local CON
Germ and even to record public senti-
ment concerning them without assailing
one another in reciprocal defamation
which in its aggregate and essence SIAN
ders and Injuries the whole community.
Consider the controversy over the ac-
tion of the Board of Trade in respect
to referendum on the prohibition ques-
tion. The boards traditional policy in
respect to liquor traffic controversies has
been one of total abstinence from ac-
tion upon them. The referendum reso-
luton specifically diselaims any intent
to violate this policy and this custom. 1t
asserts that at is not the purpose of
the Washington Board of Trade by this
resolution to put itself upon record as
either favoring or opposing the adoption
Of such (prohibition) law
A few of those who oppose the refer
endum resolution have treated that
declaration by the board as insincere
and false and have stigmatized as
"wets" all who voted for the proposed
referendum. and even all who failed to
vote against it.
This diagnosis of the situation is in
accurate. 1t is known that part of
those who voted for the referendum will
vote for prohibition if the referendum
10 granted. 1t is also strongly indicated
that some of those who voted to post
pone consideration of the referendum
proposal did so not because they favored
prohibition, but because they felt that
the referendum proposition had been
converted by violence into saloon and
anti-saloon controversy, which ought
not to be considered at all by the Board
Of Trade.
To stigmatize as "wets" those "drys"
who believe in the local option system
and wish to secure it for the District by
the referendum is, of course, resented by
them as defamatory and offensive; and
Il, moreover, in the highest degree i'm
polite.
It assumes that nobody favors pro-
Aibition except those who vote against
the referendum proposal, and thus in
effect alleges that out of nearly 1,400
members of the Board of Trade less
than one hundred are prohibitionists,
and that out of the hundreds of mem
bers of the Chamber of Commerce and
the Retail Merchants Association only
. half dozen or so are "drys."
This assumption unjustly depreciates
the strength of prohibition sentiment in
Washington.
The same criticism as unjust and i'm
polite applies to the "befouling of ones
own nest" involved in the charge that in
the event of a referendum on prohibition
this voting community win be debauched
By the liquor dealers money.
This accusation implies that men and
women of this community who would
naturally vote for prohibition are Pc
culiarly bribable and would vote
against prohibition because bought by
the saloonkeepers' dollars. An cleo
torate which is easily debauched for one
purpose is thereafter as readily de-
bauched for any other purpose. If this
community is unfit and cannot be
trusted to express its honest opinion
concerning prohibition it will reason
ably be viewed as unfit and not to be
trusted to vote on any other vital issue.
This self.slander of community
which morally and intellectually is un-
surpassed in the whole country Injuries
incalculably the movement to secure
representation in the national govern
ment for the District of Columbia and
to obtain from Congress in enacting
local laws a maximum of consideration
for expressions of local public senti-
ment in respect TO such legislation.
We are wisely and authoritatively ad-
monished to be temperate in all things,
including, of course, our verbal utter