The Illinois issue., January 19, 1906, Page 2, Image 2

About The Illinois issue. (Chicago, Ill. ;) 1906-1912

Image provided by: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL

                
Marked Advance in Last Illinois Legislature
Damaging Admission by Liquor Dealers7 Association
Official Concerning $100,000 Legislative Fund
BRIEF REPORT OF PROGRESS.
The work of the Anti-Saloon League of Illinois for the passage of a
sweeping Local Option Bill has attracted attention throughout the entire
country, because of the importance of the state, the dominance of its great
city and the strength of its liquor interests.
The campaign in the legislature of 1905 was spectacular. Results are
the best test of any campaign. In 1903 the Local Option Bill never came out
of the senate committee; in 1905 it was reported favorably by the committee
and passed the Senate. In 1903 only thirty-six votes were mustered in the
House against the amendment which killed it; in 1905 there were sixty
eight, just one less than enough to save it. In 1903 out of fifty-seven mem
bers in the Lower House from Cook* county, only four voted against killing
the bill; last time, there were nineteen, or one-third of the delegation. And
it should be remembered that in 1903 the Liquor Dealers were caught nap
ping while in the last session they were fully prepared and organized.
There is nothing discouraging in the situation. The League in Ohio, the
birthplace of the movement, came within one vote of winning in 1900. The
churches persevered and as the result of co-operative church temperance
work in that state, out of 1,371 townships, 975 are now “dry”; of 763
municipalities, 460 have no legalized dramshops, and 53 residence districts
in the large cities, with an aggregate population of more than 300,000, have
banished the saloon.
There were three things which it was deemed necessary to accomplish
during the legislative session, to prevent a possible reaction of sentiment.
First.—Arouse the church generally to a realization of the importance
of the issue involved and the opportunity offered.
Second.—Convince the politicians that the church was aroused and that
the only safe course was to give Local Option a fair chance.
Third.—Prove to the church by a demonstration of her power in specific
instances that she can ultimately win upon so popular and righteous a
proposition against any political combination.
There were two possible courses in dealing, for example, with the Senate
“combine,” which killed the bill in 1903, and was preparing to do it again.
First.—To ask politely and deprecatingly for the passage of the bill as
a favor, with an implication that we would continue to be polite and pleasant
if it was not forthcoming. This would secure the approval of members of
the “combine,” but no legislation.
Second.—To force action. This was strenuous and unpleasant but gave
a chance of immediate victory and insured ultimate success, because
such “organizations” can not long withstand the pressure of public senti
ment.
The League chose the second course. The most important instrument
was a concerted discussion throughout the state. When in obedience to
popular demand expressed primarily in more than two thousand churches,
on a given day, the Senate brought the Local Option Bill out of committee
and passed it, the church in Illinois entered upon a new era of influence and
power.
The liquor estimate of the campaign is found in an interview with one of
the officers of the State Liquor Dealers’ Association, published in the Peoria
Herald-Transcript, July 23, 1905, which, after an unqualified statement that
the Association intended to raise a fund of $100,000 to fight Local Option and
the League, is, in part, as follows:
“* * * * there is but
hard fight. V
“* * * * The public
■yvith the referendum attached al
^hing to do and that is to prepare tor a
kuov^ it, but the Local Option Bill
^became a law. * * * It is sur
% “ No nation, no matter how glori- x
• ous its history, can exist unless it
<$> practices, mind you, not merely |>
% preaches—civic honesty, civic de- ^
X coney, civic righteousness. No nation y>
<4> can permanently prosper unless the %
% Decalogue and the Golden Rule are x
x its guides in public as in private |>
<£ life.”—President Roosevelt. %
Field Day at De Kalb
Sunday, December 31st was Anti
Saloon League Field Day at De Kalb.
All the churches of the city were
open to speakers of the League, and
interested audiences were present at
all meetings. Messrs. Burke, Ever
hart and Bentall spoke in the Con
gregational, Methodist and Baptist
churches respectively, at the morn
ing service. In the afternoon, a large
number of men had gathered at the
Y. M. C. A. Hall to listen to Mr.
Everhart, who delivered to them a
stirring address on the broader ideas
of the League.
In the evening two mass-meetings
were held at De Kalb, one at the
Methodist church, in which all the
American churches united. Mr.
Burke handled the legislative situ
ation, and took up in details, the
questions of the Local Option Bill,
bringing forth forcible arguments
which made plain that the bill which
was introduced in the last Legisla
ture was absolutely fair, righteous
and in keeping with the principles
of true Americanism.
The other mass-meeting was held
in the Swedish Mission Church, in
which the Swedish Congregational
and Swedish Baptist people joined,
the speaker being Mr. Bentall.
These meetings practically sig
nalled the opening of the campaign
in the 35th District, and the people
who attended the mass-meetings are
determined to get out and win a
victory for a representative who will
stand square on the Local Option
question. The fight is against Mr.
Castle, the former representative
who was Chairman of the Judiciary
Committee in the House of the last
General Assembly, and whose hand
was shown through the entire ses
sion of the last legislature in favor .
of the liquor element. His boast
that his district wanted to defeat