Bishop Merrill On Temperance

The following artiole, taken from the Chicago ínter Ocean, was written by Bishop Merrill, of the M. E. Church. It will beof especial interest just now from the action taken and promineuce given It by the recent Detroit Conference, held in Pontiac : Thequestion is: " How can constitutlonal prohibiüou beobtained?" As already said. it must be by the will of the people. It can neither be enacted nor enforced in opposition to the public sentiment. The real work to be done is in creating, exciting, and concentrating public sentiment. The people must be stirred up to think. They must be educated, aroused, alanned. Facts, stern, formidable, appalling, must be pressed u pon their attention, till they feel the magnitude of the evil, and see the practicability of the means proposed to remJy it. The appeal must be to their manhood, to their putriotism, to their uumanity. It must strike a deeper sentiment than that which alliea them to party or determines their choice of policy in ordinary legislation. IT MUST COME INTO THEIR HE ARTS and touch the ties that bind them to home and kindred ; yea, it must enter thesanctuary of their devotions. and lay itself upon their inner oonsciousness of obliga - tion to God and duty. Unless the cause can reach this reserve power of moral principie and build Itself upon the foundation of ultímate right, in the unobstructed workings of enlighteued conscience, it can not succeed, Can it not do thisf If not, why not ? Men will treat the subject lightly and thrust it from them with superficial thought so long as temporizing and superficial methods are proposed for dealiug with it. If its advocates put it on a low phiiie the people will undervalue it. If It comes to them as a party measure they will thrust it aside as a politician's plea for party preferment or gáin. If it comes to them under the props of party machlnery, with candidatos and offleeseekers in its trail, it comes orerloaded with personal elemcnts and side issues, and at once encounters poUtical hiases tliat will deaden its appeal to the deeper and nobler sentimeuta of reason, conseienee, and humanity. There are two methods of procedure open to tiie friends of prohibition. The one is with and the other is without sepa rate political organización. Which is preferable? Uudoubtedly that which pronilses the permanent success of the cause, in the shortest time, and with the least friction and animoeity. IT MAY BE THAT 80MK cherish the conjecture that both methods, substantially, can be employed ; but this is a delusion. If we adopt the party method we must adhere to it and make it successful by party methods, or we must fail. There is no such thing as gecuring the sympathy and co-operation of the good men in the other parties without loducing them to abandon their party afnliatioii8 and join the new party which we propose for them. It needs no argument to show that thls is an undertaking of snch magnitude that generations will be required to nccomplish It. The usual argument in favor of thls method is that the separate party organlzation was successful in the oíd contest with slavery. This is unsupported assumption. The separate-party vote only strengthened the hold of the pro-slavery power, and gave it such assured control of the governnient as to intensify the contemptitentertiiined for the opposition. The separate-party (lid not. succeed. Providence interposed, circumstances changed, old party lines were disrupted, and the slave power was broken by influences which no man can trace to any separate political organization. The analogy is not complete. The precedent does not apply. The fallacy is manifest. It remains that no great reform, involving moral elements, has ever been successfully carried out in this country through the agency of separate political organization. THIS DOBS NOT PBOVB that such an achievcment will forever remalu impossible, but it suggests the necessity of serious inquiry before assuming the practlcability of a moveinent incumbered with so many grave difflculties, and fraught with such questionable elements. One of the serious objections to this plan is that it can not concéntrate the temperance sentiment of the country. In splte of fate and good intentions it will aliénate men by hundreds and thousands whose moral instinets are right and whose influence miglit be securea for prohibition on any plan that imply appeals to their consclences as men, as citizens, and at Cbriitians. This battle is too great to be fought by factions. It requires unión, wisdom, prudence, as well as courage and persistence. The oíd Liberty party, of which so many fine things have been said, never enrolled more tlian a sinall fmction of the anti-sl'ivery sentiment of the country, and t lierefor never became formidable. The Prohibition party in its party organization Includes only about 3 per cent. of the prohibition sentiment. The votes it casts will not amount to that much. In the state of Ohio, for instance, uiuler very unfavorable clrcumstances, the direct vote for constitutional prohibition was 323,000, while the vote for party candiilates was about 11,000. This is less l hu ti 3 per cent., and the proportion is not better in other places. IN SUCH LKADING PROIHBITION STATES as Kansas and Iowa the ratio is much smaller. It is a mere fraction. lts leaders are earnest and zealous, but they do not command the followintf needed for success. Modesty is a virtue which in itself Is not less beautiful becnuse the lacera of this faction fail to cultívate it. I. is not to be assumed that wisdom is always with niajorities, but It is scarcely to be believed that this very email rulnority ii the ranks of the pronlbltlonteU have ucquiretl a monopoly of this grace. Iu the multitudes of the non-partisan friends of the cause there are some whose judginents ought to entitle them to respect; vet, in the clamor of the politicians, all voices are drowned which do not shout the praises of "the management." Prudence is pronounced cowardice. Conciliatory irethods are derided as compromises witli sin. E very practical measure which seeks tl.e co-operatiou of those who abide in tlieir old political asgo:iations is set at nuught as lacking in principie. The resu't is that much the larger number of pnhibitionUts are ignored, and the Kinall minority stand out before the public as tht reprcsentatives and strength of the catse, while the chief supporters of the public sentiment which must ultimately acliieve the victory, deplore the unwisdoin of Üiis state of things, and patiënt ly and sad.y wait the coming of the day when the battle for prohibition will be PITCUBD UPON GBOUND BBOAD ENOCGH for all it.s real friends to stand upon, and where they can tight under a leadership strongenough to concéntrate ail available forcea. Constitutional provislons should never be made the basis of party organizations. The organic law of the State and the Nation ought to have the support of pat) iotic citizens In all parties. The only way to secure this end is to avoid thrusting party platforms into the constitution. Prohibition of the liquor traffln can not be permanent till it is in the constitution, and it cannot go into the constitution as a party measure. It is too broad for a party. Like the fundamental principies of the government, it must be the common ground of the better classes in all partis; like the common school system, it touches interests too vital to the common weal to be made the foot-ball of politicians. Parties divide on iuterpretations of the constitución, not on the constitution Itself. Interpretations from policies, and party issues relate to policies. This is the legit mate bat tle-ground of politics. But there is a realm of principie beyond the couflicts of parties, where the moral character of the government reets upon the foundation of rhjht - where the enduring eleinentsof Christian civilization crystalize in organic law - and to that broader realm of essential right this questiou of prohibition must come. ANOTHBR SKHIODS OBJKCTIOK to the party feature is, that it renders it Inexpedient and improper for the churches to take the active part in the advocacy of thecausethatisdesirable. When the party is organized, with candidatos in the Held, the conferences, sy uods, associations, and conventions of the churches can not and will not give indorsement to the measures proposed. They are excluded by the nature of their constitutions, and must stand aloof, as ecclesiastical bodies, whatever individuals in their communioasmuy think or dc8ire. It also gilences the pulpit to a very great extent. Ministers who regard the sacredness of their calling will not turn their pulpits into electioneering rostrums. They can not do it in gooil conscience, nor ought they to be expected to do it. When prohibition stands upon its merits as a question of essen tial right, affecting Individuals, families, society, and the public welfare, with no party machinery uttached, it is open for f ree discussion in pulpits, churches, conferences, and synods, where the whole power of the moral sentiment of these agencies may be brought to its support; but the act of narrowiug itdown to a political party contest cutí off all these, or requires them to go out of their sphere, and risk división and strife and the loss of much of their influence in the endeavor to do In an nndesirable way what they would do heartlly in the absence of the party entanglements. IT 18 ALSO IN ACCOHDANCi: with precedent to expect that as soon as tlie party gains a llttle standing, so as to promise to hold the "balance of power," it will be overrun by a classof men whose influence will not add to its reputation or moral standing. Disgruutled politicians of every grade will drop into it. Ainbitious offlce-Heekcrs will rush for the leadership. Modest men of moral worth will tind themselves ovet borne by the clamorous zeal of political bankrupts, wlio have nothing to lose and everything to gain iu whatever fortune comes to the party, In a word, Uien, the writer, after forty years of active work in the temperance cause, and as an advocate of every measure that promlses restriction to the liquor trafflc, and looking with grateful appreciation upon the growth of that moral sentiment which promises constitutional proliibition, deeply regrets the efforts to remove this great question from its proper place in the churches, the homes, the schools, and the unpartisau gatharings of the people, and its identification with a political party wliere his own and hundreds of tliousands of other voice must be huslied or uninfluentiat tor good. He protesta in the interests of the cause itself - a cause which haa been sacred to him from childhood- a cause WlIIfir 18 IIK1HKK ANP HOMKIl than any party, and broader than any political platform. He would Devvraakany existing party to adopt it as a party measure, and would never encumber it with a party organization. Hundreds of thoitsaixts in both the old parties will vote for prohibition, but will not go out of their parto do it. Wise management will hold it where appeal can be made to men to support it, regardless of party, on the broad ground of morality, humanlty, and public utility, remcmberlng tlmt two-thirds of the reul legislatiou of the country is nonpartisan Iu lts character, and that it is a mistake to suppose that this great measure must have a political party behind it to malte it successful.