Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1920-09-06
MAY BRING BACK THE SALOON.

and other church commandments who
are normally Republicans are going to
vote for Mr.. Cox this year, so it is re-
ported. because they favor league of
nations covenant on lines Of the Yer
saillcs document. If that is the only
reason they are going to support Mr..
Cox it is flimsly one. No matter if
Mr.. Cox is elected president by the
largest majority a Democrat ever
secured, the maltered Versailles league
of nations pact is dead beyond resur-
rection. Mr.. Cox knows this and all
other reasonably well informed people
know it. 1t is impossible for the Yer
saillcs covenant to get twO-thirds ma
jority in the United States senate.
There must be compromise and one
that is satisfactory to sponsors of the
Versailles commitment is no more liza
bic under Mr.. Cox than under Mr..
Harding.
These are facts that cannot be refut-
ed and any Republican that votes for
Cox under the misrepresentation that
Cox can ratify the covenant as brought
home by President Wilson will find in
the event of Democratic victory this
fall that he or she was deceived, just
as hundreds Of thousands of Republi-
cans were deceived in 1916 by the silly
prattle that he kept us out of war.
1t has been argued by some Rcpubli-
cans who pretend to he for Cox be-
cause of the league issue that the Re-
nublicans in the senate will be bound
TO support the Versailles covenant if
the Democratic party wins on that is
sue. But such reasoning is not backed
by experience or logic. Republicans
who are elected to the senate will be
elected on the pledges of their party
platform and they will represent their
constituents. If Senator Cummins is
elected from Iowa does anybody think
he will change his mind on the Yer
sailles treaty merely because of the
election of Cox? Will not Senator
Cummins owe allegiance to the people
who elected him rather than to those
who elect Mr.. Cox.
In 1896 the protective tariff was one
of the paramount issues of the cam
paign. Well, William Mckinley was
elected president by an unusual major
ity. Yet Democrats elected to congress
at the election consistently opposed the
protective tariff measures advocated by
Mckinley and the Republican con
gress. Democratic Representatives
were doing just what they were elected
to do. If those representing such free
trade states as Mississippi, Georgia.
Albania. South Carolina and the others
had voted for protection they
would have been bitterly denounced by
the people who elected them and ac-
cused of deserving their principles.
4 number OF years ago the people
of Iowa, at Il non-partisan election, en-
dorsed prohibition by nearly 10000
ma iority. The gubernatorial contest of
1883 was waged between the forces OF
prohibition and the liquor interests. the
Democratic party taking the side OF
whiskey Buren, II. Sherman was the
Republican nominee and l.. &. Kline
tbc Democratic, while James =.
Weaver was the GrCenDack candidate
which party had quite following in
Iowa at that time At the election
sherman received 164,095 votes, Kline
14O. O;s2 and Weaver 23OS9, and Weaver
was for prohibition. Hence the major
ity for prohibition in that election was
really I7.154 instead of only 24,0G3, the
ma jority given Mr.. Sherman.
However. the fight for control OF the
legislature was very close, the Re
publicans carrying the house by only
one or two majority. The Freeman
Journal is writing this from memory
and may not he absolutely correct in
the figures But as we recall it, the
house contained 30 Republicans and -
Democrats so close that every Republi-
can vote was needed. Judge Weaver.
now a member of the state supreme
court. was member of the house at
that time and was so ill that he was
taken to tn" legislative chamber on IA
as his vote for prohibition
was absolutely necessary. At that time.
the winter of 1854. we believe. the
Democrats in the Iowa legislature did
not recognize the non-partisan majority
of nearly 10000 for prohibition nor the
ma iority of 47.l54 given gubernatorial
ca ndidatcs who favored prohibition.
No. Every Democrat in the legislature.
RS we remember it. save one from Ere
mont county. voted against prohibition.
and rhe Fremont county man was sew
,rely castigated by his party associates
FOR proving traitor to his party and
10 the constituents who elected him,
SO much Tor the theory that senator's