Year: 1874

lpon traffic can be so regarded But
they can not. 4f


Sumptuary laws are limited in their
operation to the person whose individual


indulgence or enjoyment is intended to
e restrained; not because the indul-
Ience or enjoyment may be injurious to
lin, but because of whatever purpose or
vhim may influence the author of the


,umptuary edict.


Legislation in restraint of intemper-


tnce is, therefore, in no sense sumptuary.
1t is directed against what is regarded


Us an injury, and therefore an evil. not
only to the individual, but to society and
he State.


The existing laws against intemper-


ance are designed for the protection of


society, in precisely the same sense as


laws against personal assaults, libel, or


other, offense. The question Eis, shall
they be maintained and made more eff
cient, as time and experience may sug-


sest ? or shall they be substituted by
license law, of which the Democratic


party now constitutes itself the cham


pion and standard bearer? The Repub-


lican party favors the first, proposition,
and in this the difference.


The defense of alcohol is not the first
unholy cause which the Democratic party


has champioued: possibly its efforts may
meet kindred fate.


Countless millions of capital it is urged
are invested in the traffic, which must
be lost to its propretors if the markets
OF the State be closed to it, if the liberty
of desolating homes and destroying man
hood be denied; if the bulwark of the
Constitution do not make its operation
and tenure secure.


IS o11 oF
power. Two thousand millions in slaves
must be made secure; and Democracy
rushed to its championship, gave it the


fugitive slave law, tore down the Missou-
RI compromise, and opened the bred
Scott decision. The champions of the


liquor traffic would do we'll to remember
the lesson Ohio is not prepared to ac-
cede to its demands, tear down existing
legislation, and frame for it fugitive slave
laws.


Our prohibition friends may not aid us
in this struggle. They prefer to fight
alone. Poundtex and Mucklewrath re-
fused to unite with the sons of Belial
against a common foe Harranguing
their followers at Boutwell, bridge to 90
into the battle apart, the Duke of Nom
mouth swept down and extinguished
their forces in detail Ours to the extent
OF constitutional power is common cause
with them. Because there are individ-
ual Republicans not concuring with either,
they prefer the triumph of the enemy to
dividing the honor of joint victory The
bulls in the fable, though having differ
ences between them, by uniting their
strength, kept the lion at bay Separat-
ing, they fell an easy prey to the King of
the forest. Do prohibitionists by separ-
ating expect other fate at the hands of
King Alcohol? They may by indirection
aid in sweeping away existing laws
they may secure the enactment of oppos-
ing, and vicious laws instead they may
surrender the legislative, judicial, and
police powers of the State to adverse
hands; they may postpone. the triumph
OF virtue and sobriety, with the expecta-
ton that the reaction of future genera
tions will carry their cause to higher
pitch. We'prefer its realizat on in some
degree by the children of the present
Will they, then, accept the highest good
which is possible? Orwill they continue
to stand aloof, thanking God they are
not az publicans and sinners, until all is
lost? To them for this course, none will
be so gratful as those who oppose their
cause; none so jubilant, when we shall
have been defeated, as those who execrate
that cause.