Press enter after choosing selection

Prohibition Has Its Day

Prohibition Has Its Day image
Parent Issue
Day
15
Month
October
Year
1890
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

The wane of tbc tliird party idea marks anotlier one of tl. ose cases of the strange persistence of ideas founded solely on emotion and sentiment. In a recent dlscnftslon amoiiL temperance men on the questlon: "Sliould there be a political party wlio-:e dominant Idea is the prohibition of the liquor traffic?1' Kev. Dr. H. K. Cirro!], an editor of "The Independent" made the followtng sensible remarks: "Tuis question is not quite as definite as it miglit be; but I nssume that wjiat Is mi'ant to ask is, whether there should be a National politica! party whose dominant idea is the prohibitiou of the liquor traille. Upon tilla aísuinption I shall proceed to show, as lully as the time alloted me will pennlt, th.it sucli a party is not needed. My lirst answer to the question is, that prohibition is not, excepe in a very lirnited sense, within the scope of the powera confided to Congress in the Constitution of the United States. Uoiiffiess has no power to legiflate on the subject of prohibition within the boundárlea of any of the States. This power the states never surreudered to the Federal Government, but reserved to themselves. Tliere can be no prohibition in a siugle one of the forty-two States except by the will and actioii8 of the states themselves. Congress cannot mafco the Üret move to secure prohibition in tliis state of New York or in any other state of the Union. Congress can país no laws for tlie enforcement of state prohibition, constitutional or otherwise. It can tax ; but it cannot license, recúlate or prohibit the manufacture orsale of intoxicanls within the states. The only power it has with respect to intoxicants is restricted to the Terrilories and the District of (Jolumbia, to army and navy regulatlon?, and to importations in so far as they come under the head of forein or intcr-statc commerce. Tliis iudicatcs the entire scope of prohibition as a National question. My second answer is that whlle it is withiu the power of three-fourths ot the states to add an amendment to the constitution of the United States vesting in Congressfull power to enaot and enforce prohibition in the states, as well as in the Terriiories, it is inconceivable that the states .will ever do so. Beeai&e, lirst, they would havo to f-urrender a very large part of their pólice power to the Federal Government; because, second, the exercise of thls pólice power, whlch is peculiarly appropriate to the st.itis, would be difllcult if not impnssihlc to the Federal Government, because, third, it woulu necesítate two sets of magistrates aud pólice in every city, town and village in tne country ; and necausc, rmuiit, there would arise conllicts between the state and Federal pólice. National prohibition without a large nat Ion al pólice torce behind it would be utterly futile. From the nature of the case, a natkmal pólice could not be as effective as state pólice. I do not believe there is a state in the Union, however strong its prohibition sentiment may bc, that would ratify sueh an umendment. My third answer is that the experiment has alrcady been trled. We liave a party in politics wliose dominant idea ia (ledarcd to be prohibition. lt has liad candidhites 011 tliis platform in BeTeral national campaipní. What is the rcsult? It has not ilected a single caodldate to any national prohibition, It has yet to elect i:s lirst meniber of Conrcss. lts am. regate strength h tlielat presUenlial election was less than 200,000 out of a toti.1 vote of 11,392,832. The smallness of the vote was éxplálned by the f rienda of the special party as due to the fact that the tarlöj though not a real issue, waa made an issue artiflclally by the o!d parties. N ow, ifan artificial issue can thuá tib-orb nlinost the entire votlnp; stvength of the country, despite the presenee in the Held of a party with prohibition as its dominant idea, wheie will tlie FpPCial party appear when the old parties brlng a rea] issue loto thearen-i? Moreover, election stfitietics show that this special party polled a larger vote by 40,000 oti its Btate tickets in the election preceding 1888 than it got for its nutionnl ticket in the presidential election. What is the explanation of this tact if it does not mean that prohibition is a state and not a national question ? ' Sive who can !'' was the frantic cry of Napolean to liis army at Wattrïoo. Save bealth and strength while you can, by the use of Ayer's SarsaparJlla, Is advice that applies to all, both youug and old. Don't walt until disease fastens on you; bogin at once.

Article

Subjects
Old News
Ann Arbor Courier