The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1922-05-19

But | raise this question: Is there any
limit in a democracy, is there any
limit to the power of a majority? Is
it true that the moment the majority
has spoken that therefore it becomes
moral obligation upon every lndivid-
ual in the Commonwealth to implicitly
obey that command? Two hundred and
fifty years ago the question was made
by our ancestors. Then it took the
form not of the divine right of majorI-
ty, but of the divine right of kings,
and we were exhorted by publicists
and priests-we were eXhorted to obey
the mandate of the king because it
was the Voice of God. We are asked
today unreasonably and unQuestion
ably to obey the mandate of a MAORI
ty because it is the Voice of God. The
king whose divine beheStS We're en-
forced upon us by the same argument
insisted upon making more and more
stringent regulations until finally he
lost his head. Is it possible that the
majority may lose their heads? Or
that they may fall ultimately into
such contempt that no one will obey
the laws whether for good or i'll. And
one thing more, | recognize that laws
are to be obeyed and that the eXhor
tation which our law abiding teachers
insist upon is right and wise, but be-
fore we turn upon them and say,
Gentlemen, if you insist that we must
obey this law because it is a law,
then We ask you, we ask you in all
honesty and consistency if you will
join US in making the law such as we
can obey it as reasonable men. Cap
plause) If you will not do that then
stop your celebrations because they
are valuless and will produce no eff
feet.
Three generations ago a law was
passed by the Congress of the United
States, passed by an overwhelming
majority and tested by the Supreme
Court and pronounced sound-the
Fugitive Slave Law, which required
that every citizen in every state
should assist in restoring slaves to
servitude. The very same type of peo-
pie who are now clamoring in season
and out of season for obedience to law
were the very people who utterly re-
fused to lend a hand to the enforce
ment of that law. 1t depends upon
whose OK is gored.
We believe in the regulation of the
liquor traffic as we believe in the
regulation of the trade in wheat, but
we do not believe in law which is
tyrannical, preposterous, which vio-
lates the old legal maXim-the law
does not concern itself with trifles.
Here is a law which does concern
itself with trifles and loses all sense
of proportion and provides greater
penalty for being found with liquor
in your pockets, whether you have
drunk any of it or not, than the penal
ty for manslaughter or for arson.
(Applause.)
Liberty is in danger of being lost,
and as a citizen and a clergyman, hav-
ing in mind and knowing perhaps as
we'll as those who take the other side
of this matter, knowing the evils of
intemperance, | would still join with
the great English Archbishop who
said: If | must choose between the
two, God forbid that the choice should
ever be necessary. If | must choose
between the two, l would rather see
England free than England sober"
(Applause.)
Mr.. Joseph Packard, the temporary
chairman said: Fellow Citizens, it
falls to my lot to take over the organi-
cation of this Convention. Since that
body will itself formulate its princi-
pies, it is not for me to anticipate. I
trust. however, that through YOUR
kindness | may venture to say word
or two on my own account and per-
haps submit the sentiments OF many
who are here.
AS | take it, we favor the striCtest
control of distilled spirits, commonly
called ardent spirits. We expect to
obey the law of the Land as it stands,
but we deplore the Eighteenth Amend
ment as impairing the rights granted
to us in the Constitution which we re-
ceived from our forefathers. Gap
plause.l And we have made up our
minds that by every proper means we
will strive to bring about the repeal
of the Volstead Act as impairing the
rights-impairing in many ways the
rights of a free people, and as being
in violation of the terms of the Eigh-
teenth Amendment itself in that it
inhibits the use of all beverages
which are not in fact intoxicating.
(Applause) The result of this has
been to stimulate the underhand use
of ardent spirits often of a very dele
terious character, and to make whisky
drinkers out of men who were for
merly drinkers of beverages not at all
harmful. but the radical objection to
it is that it forces upon all of us the
opinion of some as to the use of beer
and wine which have been part of the
diet of mankind for hundred genera
tions. (Applause)
This convention is the first step in
the direction of that desirable con-
summation. which l believe is going
to come. (Applause)
The Chair is now ready to receive
and entertain a motion for the or
ganization of the Convention.
The Convention proceeded to or
ganize with Mr.. Shirley Carter as per-
manent chairman.