Newspaper Page Text
lI- ; . f
Vol. YIII. —No. 27, r i) the white wall the shadows steal apace; *OM\ Fast slips the day. the day that promised <%™At a morn I rose with flushed and eager And tothe hillside turned to toil my share; But at the gate I paused and pulled a rose. Then idled where the goldfish glance and gleam; And Lise and Lettice called me from the BeneatiTthe my rtles there to lounge and dream, And so with laugh and jest the morning sped. Ere I could guess it. it was afternoon. "And why go now'.’ Stay yet awhile, they said "Tomorrow toil, today is all too soon.’ Thus with my life: A youth that promised fair, The world’s broad highway for my eagar feet; But pleasure wooed me from the noonday glare, \nd old age finds me with no task complete. —Maukicf. Gordon , KEALDOWS WATCHWOItIIS MTHETWEffIETH CEMiy AN ORATION, BY JOSEPH COOK, DE LIVERED AT PROHIBITION PARK, STATEN ISLAND, JUNE 3, 1894. AT THE CELEBRATION OF NEAL DOW’S NINETI ETH BIRTHDAY. License always implies the legaliza tion of a portion of the liquor traffic*. It aims also to repress a portion of that traffic. It contains thus both a sanction and a condemnation of the saloon. It is a statutory authorization of a part I of the traffic. It is also in theory a statu tory limitation of another part of the traffic. It is this double character of License which causes, even among in telligent voters, so much confusion of thought concerning it. But it is highly important to emphasize the fact that License. represses one portion of the traffic only at the expense of sanctioning another portion of it. This simple analysis of the delinition of license answers most of the arguments in defense of it. The question is asked whether ten saloons are not better than fifteen. The reply is they are not, if the fifteen can be reduced to ten only by definitely giving the sanction of Government to the ten. Are not ten murders better than twenty? No, if the twenty can be reduced to ten only by a statutory authorization of the ten. Is not half a loaf better than no bread ? No, if the half loaf can be had only on •condition that it be lirst saturated with poison, and this by the authority of the whole community. Did not Moses licence polygamy and so attempt to limit its range? Yes, but not at the expense of assuming that the Divine sanction was given to polygamy within the actual range to which it was limited. Of two evils, must not we choose the less? No, if in choosing the less we are required to do evil ourselves. Of two evils, choose neither. License makes the community itself a rum-seller. It has now become dis- FAILURE. CiIAPTEH VI. * Bouvier, in his Law Dictionary, de fines license as “a right given by some competent authority to do an act which, without such authority, would be il legal.” The text of the document giv ing a license usually reads: ‘’License is hereby given by authority of the city of to A. B. to keep a saloon and to sell,” etc., All this shows that license means legalization of a portion of the liquor traffic. A tax, on the contrary, confers no authority on him who pays it Bouvier detines a tax as a “con tribution imposed by Government on individuals for the service of the State. It is futile, therefore, to contend that license is simply a tax upon the traffic and only a limitation of it, and not an authorization of a portion of it. reputable for the individual to be a | rum-seller. Comparatively few native Americans engage in the retail liquor traffic. The foremost Christian denom inations, such as the Methodist and Presbyterian, exclude liquor-sellers from church membership. But license, high or low, makes the *tate a liquor seller. As Horace Greeley was accus tomed to say, “It is disreputable enough for the individual, under the pressure of personal wants, to become liquor seller; but for the whole State to become such, and this with no necessity, but from pure greed and cowardice, is infa mous”. The actual saloon of our clay is notori ously a school of crime, an ally of anarchy, a fountain of social misery, a source of heavy taxation, a cesspool of political corruption. License makes the whole community a partner in the business of the actual saloon. To that business, with these results, License gives governmental sanction, and so a legal respectability. But the actual saloon in most cases has infamous allies. The gambling-hell and the brothel and the gilded High License saloon usually go together in great cities, As Prof, Herrick .Johnson says in an epigram not soon to be forgotten, “Low License asks for your son; High License for your daughters, also.” High License tempts the salaon to make alli ance with the gambling-hell and the brothel so as to raise funds to pay the High License fees. This temptation is rarely resisted. License of the saloon, therefore, may easily amount in effect to a license of gambling and harlotry. It is assumed in this discussion that the wickedness of licensing these allies of the saloon is admitted. But the community that fosters the liquor traf fic by giving it legalization, does prac tically make itself largely responsible for the usual allies of the traffic. Liquor-selling, it is sometimes said, is not a sin in itself. But the business of the actual saloon is what is in ques tion. We think that this is a sin in it self, fully justifying the exclusion of the liquor-seller from church member ship, as it now does in the leading evan gelical denominations. But certainly the business, even if it were not a sin in its circumstances. The wickedness of all forms of license is proved by the wickedness notoriously resulting from the business of the actual saloon of our day. To make the community a partner in that business and its results by license high or low. is not only the worst social economy, but also ethical wickedness. The actual liquor traffic, as the Metho dist Church officially declares, -can never be legalized without sin.” It may not be a sin in itself to light a match, but it is a sin in its circumstances to light a match in a powder magazine. The actual saloon manufactures paup ers, criminals, widows, orphans, madmen and lost souls, and license of the actual saloon makes the community itself a participator in this wickedness. Licence proceeds upon self-contradic tory principles. It sanctions the traffic with one hand and condfems it with the other. In the days of the American conflict with slavery, Government treated slave-holding as a crime north of Mason and Dixon’s line. All the power of the Government was to be brought to bear against it there. One hair’s-breadth south of that line, however, slavery changed its character and was to be permitted. All the powers of the Government were to be exercised to defend it there. History has now proved that apolicy thus divided against itself could not prosper. Under a licence system, Government treats the liquor traffic as it once did slavery. The li cense fee is Mason and Dixon’s line. On one side of that line Government condemns the traffic. A hair’s-breadth across the line, on the other side, Gov ernment defends it. These principles are self-contradictory. A house divided against itself cannot stand. “IT IS NEVER TOO LATE TO MEND.” STILLWATER, MINNESOTA, JANUARY 7, 1895. License forces the saloon into politics, disciplines the enemy, and so is the source of untold political corruption. The licensed liquor traffic corrupts the police force and the lower courts, and is the chief source of municipal mis rule, which is the principal peril of free institutions. License apparently brings a revenue to the State, and sq intrenches the traf fic behind the cupidity of short-sighted taxpayers. It robs Peter to pay Paul, but it does not pay Paul. The expenses which the traffic brings upon the com munity greatly exceed any profit arising from license fees. But this fact is overlooked by average voters. The money there appears to be in license is a temptation to the State and a chief scource of the political power of the saloon. It is, nevertheless, the estimate of the best statisticians that, for every dollar which the State gains by license of the liquor traffic, it loses 318 by di rect damages caused by that traffic. License does not for any length of time diminish the amount of sales of liquor, although for awhile it may diminish the number of places in which liquor is sold. But the large establishments often own the small ones and foster the illegal trade of the latter. The gilded saloons want the low dives kept open to receive the refuse constituency of the former. When the drunkard be comes a noisy and loathsome sot, he is turned out of the Opper into the lower | grade of saloons. License gives the traffic legal, indus trial. political and social respectability, and so increases the power of the saloon to tempt the respectable classes, and lowers and corrupts the temperance sentiment of the community at large. The city government of Omaha, under High License of the saloons, has sunk to so low a level that it now derives a large revenue from arrangements nearly approaching the licensing of houses of unreportable infamy. License prohibits Prohibition, for it always provides for the continuance of the traffic. The revenue w hich the mis led voter suffers the State to obtain from High License, although it by no means covers the damage inflicted b) the traffic, and is collected from the •victims of the saloons and their families, operates as a golden bar to Prohibition. The higher the license fee the higher and stronger is this bar. It is notori ous that the policy of License is favored ! by politicians as a means of defeatiing Prohibition. The Chicago Tribune very justly says: “High License, reasonably and properly enforced, is the only bar rier against Prohibition in the present temper of the people in almost every State of the Union.'’ In January, 1889, the Omaha Bee said: “The only effec tive way to block Prohibition is to en force rigidly High License.” License is genearlly approved by the liquor traffic itself. License, so far as it produces ap parently good results, owes its seeming success to its restrictive features. The Brooks Law in Pennsylvania, for ex ample, transferred the power to grant licenses in Philadelphia and Allegheny from corrupt political Boards to Judges of reputable Courts. The J udges grant ed licenses much more cautiously than the politicians had done, and gave full force to the prohibitive elements of the aw. License has been weighed in the scales of practical experience for hundreds of years, and found wanting. The present power of the liquor traffic and the cur rent intemperance of our time, have grown up under it. Over against this indisputable fact is to be placed the fact which is indisputable, that no License and Prohibition, whenever fairly weighed in the balances, have been most significantly approved by their practical results. License is condemned as wickedness by the chief Christian denominations of our time. The celebrated declaration of the Methodist Church in its Confer ence of 1888, may now fairly be said to represent the opinion of the most en lightened and religiously earnest por tions of Christendom at large, s<> that in citing it here we summarize scores of equivalent declarations Irom other religious bodies: “The liquor traffic can never be legalized without sin. License, high or low, is vicious in prin ciple and powerless as a remedy.” It is gross inconsistency for church mem bers to vote for License and then ex clude licensed rum-sellers from church membership.* If church members would act inde pendently and vote outside the churches on this topic of the liquor traffic, as they do on the inside, there is no politi cal party that they might not bring to terms. When the path to political preferment leads them through the gin mills, free government is a farce, and its future is likely to be a tragedy. No political party in the United States can be permanently preserved in whisky. * Encyclopedia of Temperance and Prohibition. Funk and Wagnails. 1891. Article by Joseph Cook on License. See also the very able volume by E. J. Wheeler, entitled “Prohibition, the Principle, the Policy and the l arty. Funk & Wagnalls’ Standard Library. (TO BE CONTINUED. I PERSONAL ABUSE NO ARGUMENT In this country for the past ten years there has been a general tendency to ward improvement in political discus sions in the conduct of political cam paigns. Prior to 1884, personal abuse of the leaders and of the organs of the opposing parties constituted a leading feature of the stump oratory; and in the national campaign of that year, this feature reached its highest point. A reaction set in, and the politicans were quick to adapt themselves to the change in the public sentiment on this point. Since then the public speakers and party organs, have concentrated their efforts to criticisims of and attacks up on the principles, the measures advo cated, and the question of policy of their opponents’ measures; men have not been the theme of discussion, and while party spirit has run high, absence of personal attacks has been the rule. The style of speeches has also changed and reached a better tone, and though it is true that stump orators scathe the opposite party by rigorous invective, yet, they nevertheless also aim to instruct and convince their audience, to get hold of the judgment and reason of the people through argument, and to maintain debate on a higher level. Considering these facts a critical out sider, and the majority of the adherents of one of the leading parties of a cer tain north-western state, cannot but view with regret the tone and style of the editorials of its principal organ, the more so when it is a journal that has al ways prided itself upon the high char acter of its articles. It is a lamentable fact that it has not only descended to abuse, but the language used and the names applied are an excellent form of billings gate of the most scurrilous kind; and although appropriate, perhaps, in a sheet of national reputation that has been excluded from the mails, is most emphatically not appropriate in the columns of a journal of its pretentions. It is to be sincerely hoped that self interest and policy will cause it to change its tone if self-respect does not. Observer. GIVING. Some one has truly said that, “life is to each one of us what one puts into it of one’s self.” We cannot question it. To some people life stretches from earth up to heaven like the glittering ladder of Jacob’s vision, each duty a round upon which angels may descend Tcduq. i $1 .coper year, in advance, i fc.KMS.-j y ix Months 50cents. to us with divine messages, or ascend to the Father, with hands laden with our loving thoughts and upward as pirations. Life is a parable of divine meaning, and not the humblest act without its high interpretation to some people; to others it is but the lonely spot where Jacob lay down to sleep upon a pillow of stones. They do not see the angels, and miss the blessing. All nature is a parable of the divine plan of ministry to others. We see it about us. The fullest life is that which gives the most. The stone is self-con tained; it receives the air, the sun and dew and yet it neither gives nor grows. It is a lit emblem of a selfish nature. Hard, cold, self-contained, it exists, but that is all. It fills a stone's place in the world, but it is always a fixed place where limitations aie about it, and nothing but its mere existence is re quired. Nothing more completely proves that it does not live than its incapacity to give. It is the living tree that proves its life by giving. From its veil of spring-time beauty to its harvest in the autumn, it gives, hoping for nothing again, obeying the ; laws of the God of Nature who created it for ministry. It is only when nature's laws are thwarted that there is a lack of the highest fullfilment of possibili ties. The ocean gives back all that it re ceives. It lifts up clinging hands of mist to the clouds and tills them with rain, and thus the verdure that makes the whole earth beautiful with green ness and fair to see, comes from the ocean’s gifts. It is only the stagnant marsh that keeps all that it can get. All through nature we find this chain of reciprocal service. The clay elaborates its nourishing principles, not for itself, but for the higher crea tion of vegetable life. The flax does not provide linen for its own use, It ministers to the higher creation, man From the moss to the mightiest tree every plant reaches up to minister to another creation, and upon each is in • scribed the law of giving. Shall we fall below the standard of the natural creation? Let .us read the exquisite parable that is about us everywhere and , learn that to give is the purpose of life. To withhold is to defeat that purpose. Tiie Exile. WHAT ARE WE COMING TOP We may not be able to hail a cable car nor stop a bread wagon, but we are alive and in fairly good health, and that is a good deal in these hard times. As for the rest of humanity, with the banks yet tumbling around their and strikers sore and surly on every hand, the outlook is not pleasant, to.say the least. What the future will bring forth is a weighty and momentous question to nine tenths of America to day. With a financial crisis pending, beside which the experience of the past two years would be but an introduc tory chord, and with labor and capi tal at swords' points on every hand, well may men pause and say, “What next?” When England demonetized silver in India, she aimed a, deadly, pre meditated blow at our very vitals. And the worst of it is, we have ever since played directly into her hands. Instead of holding our awn (as we could have done) and totally ignoring this envious Briton, we have botcheu and congested our finances so that it will need more than a mere se rum to restore us our normal activity. And matters are growing no better. A democratic congress, and a democratic president, cannot agree; and it will not be at all singular if a republican con gress and a democratic president will not agree. Barry. Keep your heart full of sunshine, and God will soon give y° u a ace *° match it.