 Section 1 of Essays on Prohibition. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. The Health Ply by Charles Tabor Stout Prohibition failed as a moral issue because the two great American religions were traditionally opposed to it. Something new had to be tried, and the success of the drive movement in certain southern states offered a suggestion. Prohibition had made headway there because it was distinctly to the advantage of the South to remove temptation from the Negro race. Self-interest is a powerful, entering wedge for any argument. And the leaders of the drive campaign began a survey of the country in an effort to find interests which coincide with their own in which they could utilize. Of course the soft drink manufacturers were not overlooked, but while they might prove helpful from the financial standpoint later on, they were unorganized and of little influence in the country, and the selfish viewpoint would be altogether too obvious. However, three great and thoroughly systematized interests were found in receptive mood. The American Medical Association, the Life Insurance Companies, and the Standard Oil Company. There were also certain other large corporations whose efficiency experts had been able to show that alcohol was increasing the cost of labor. The American Medical Association maintained the most powerful trained lobby in the country. As far back as 1907, the association had an agent in each of the 2,830 counties of the United States, and its list of approachable political leaders numbered 16,000. Its interest was so distinctly on the side of prohibition that it has become the great power behind the movement. The financial backing of the organizations was naturally of great importance. In addition, the Life Insurance Companies were able to furnish valuable statistics and the private charities the Rockefellers offered a convenient cloak. How much the latter were influenced by the relations with organized medicine, it is impossible to say. But the plea of health and human efficiency was given the premier position in the propaganda for prohibition. In enlisting medicine in their cause, the dry party acquired one of the most powerful agencies in our modern life, the influence of the family physician. In many a home in America, this is a greater continuous force than any other. There are many stories to illustrate the doctor's prestige, but one will suffice. Tucked away in the hills of New England is a little village, the summer home of two intimate friends. As boys, they had left the same village to make their way in the world beyond. They had been schoolmates together and later on attended the same college. They were both interested in the same sports and pursuits, and the boys' friendship grew and ripened with the years. One of them took up the study of medicine, the other one into business and afterwards married. In the course of events, a child was born, in whom were fitting to attend at that critical period than the friend whom the father had learned to trust since boyhood. Other children came, and the physician and a rising practitioner cared for them through the illnesses of childhood, and the children learned to trust their father's friend. And finally, there came a time when the doctor was called upon to share in the family's affliction. The wife and mother, through an unfortunate accident, was injured beyond the curative power of any physician. But day and night he watched at her bedside, alleviating pain wherever possible and giving the immeasurable comfort of his presence and skill. If anything could add to that household's love and respect, it was his sympathy with their loss. His comprehension of their grief. You may wonder perhaps as to the precise application of this episode. It is given here because it is typical, not merely individual, because there are thousands of similar cases throughout America. Think of what that must mean, the enormous influence exerted by such physicians amongst the members of innumerable families. And this influence in itself so natural and splendid is being exploited in a partisan cause and for special and spacious interests. The general practitioner himself is not much choice in the matter. It is difficult for him to oppose for any length of time the settled policy of his professional organization. It is almost impossible for him to remain in the association and defy its crushing disciplinary powers, open and covert. He can try to do so of course if he chooses. Others have sometimes made the attempt and sometimes regretted it. As an alternative the practitioner may resign his membership in the association and become an outlaw. But that involves a new professional outlook, the severance of old ties, the uprooting of fixed habits and an absolutely fresh start. Besides he still has to face the resentment of the organization, which does not readily forget. And there is no efficient outlaw organization to which he can turn for protection. It is not surprising then that the harassed practitioner, when he differs from the views of the authorities, should decide to feign an acquiescence that he does not feel. Only the prominent and pushing, the leaders of cliques and factions have the privilege of self assertion in medical circles. The rank and file have to be content with obedience or the blacklist. End of section one. Section two of essays on prohibition. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org. The individualist position. From the handbook for speakers and writers on the drink question. Published by the Freedom Association of London, England. Those who write on the drink question should never lose sight of the broad ground of individual freedom when conducting their controversies. An Anglican archbishop once said, better England free than England sober. It was a startling bold assertion for an ecclesiastical dignitary to make, but it embodies a fundamental truth. It is possible to pay too high a price for sobriety. If a drunkard makes a public nuisance of himself, the state does right to punish him for the nuisance. That is not an infringement of liberty but protection of the liberty of others. When man commits a crime while in a drunken condition, the law holds and rightly holds that drunkenness is no answer. And that the man must be punished for his crime. But it is not the business of the state to go further. The fact that excessive drinking of fermented beverages clouds a man's higher faculties and impairs his digestion and constitutes a sinful act upon his part is no reason why the state should interfere. Otherwise we must not stop at fermented beverages. We should have to prohibit the excessive reading of cheap newspapers, which also deteriorates the higher faculties. The propensity to eat too much meat and sweets and drink too much tea, which things are impairing, are digestions. And the malicious tittle-tattle of drawing-rooms, which is sinful. Indeed there is no logical end to the interference of the state in private affairs, if once we admit the principle that because a thing is for some reason detrimental to the individual practicing it, the state should stop him. And still more if we admit the principle that because excessive indulgence in something is bad, the state should actively discountenance or positively prohibit moderate indulgence on the part of the general population. It is contended by some supporters of restriction that the state is entitled to interfere with simple drunkenness and even ordinary drinking because drunkenness often leads directly to a criminal acts. Again that is not a reason where we should have to carry the principle very far. Political discussion sometimes leads to broken heads, but we do not yet prohibit political discussion. The policeman is a guardian of the peace, not of the conscience, and his function only begins when a breach of the peace has been made or is eminently threatened. If we admit that the state has a right to probe down to the very roots once by individual perversion, disorder sometimes springs, we should inevitably arrive at a condition of intolerable slavery. That is why men who value man's most precious possession, freedom, oppose state teetotalism, even though the same men have, as they often do have, a most lively horror and vigorous detestation of drunken excess. There is another and ethical reason why sobriety should not be sought by act of parliament, the reason doubtless which moved the archbishop to utter his famous epigram, and that is the essential futility of forcing virtue mechanically upon men. It is right to guard the ignorance of little children from various temptations to evil, just as we provide them with their maintenance without expecting them to work for it. We may deplore any wrong act which men may commit and we may exhort them by counsel and encourage them by example to refrain, but it is not for us to prevent them by compulsory mechanism. We may be in dangerously near the divine prerogative and savers at any rate of presumption. Among the early Christians there was once a sect which practiced or counseled the practice of a certain physical operation in order to remove temptation to impurity. The church condemned those precursors of modern prohibition. God has endowed us with free will. This is an essential part of the providential design and has placed us in a world where our free will to do right or wrong is exposed to constant test. While it is wrong to place stumbling blocks in our neighbor's way and deliberately to multiply occasions of sins, we fall into error at the other end if we try to make a compulsory rearrangement of the universe in a say the impossible task of stamping out of existence ever human institution of which a public house is a fair illustration, which by abuse may be made in occasion of sin. For there is nothing, not even attending church which cannot be so abused. Virtue ceases to be a virtue when a man is physically prevented from being other than virtuous. It is only the fanatic or the well-meaning man in an undue hurry to make his neighbors conform to the right standard of conduct who cannot see the difference between permitting deliberate temptation such as the open circulation of pornographic literature and reasonable acquiescence in the existence of things which may be rightly used or abused. Thus we make a wider appeal than that of a mere trade interest, wider even than that of the moderate drinker who doesn't want his convenience restricted or his pocket depleted. The opponent of prohibitionist fads joins hands with all who are striving for the preservation of freedom. The drink question falls into line as an incidental feature of the struggle and it is from that standpoint that the freedom association approaches it. This standpoint is becoming all the more important now because after the war the individualist position will need restatement and emphasis to combat the efforts which will be made by politicians and social reformers to rivet upon the nation in peace the fetters which were necessary or thought to be necessary for disciplinary purposes during the war. End of Section 2 Section 3 of Essays on Prohibition This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Adams Ale by Thoreau Harris I don't like your brandy and beer, for it makes me feel mighty queer. I'll not choose it, I'll refuse it, poisonous stuff and still. Whiskey causes sorrow and woe, everywhere I happen to go. But I'm fond, tis the drink, tis the this great consp... End of Section 3 Section 4 of Essays on Prohibition This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Our Soldiers and Prohibition Written by a newspaper correspondent just back from France Sir, more than a million and a half American voters are coming back to the United States this year or next with some definite plans about the elections in 1920. They know quite well that in addition to their own ballots they will have a far-reaching influence on the political developments of the next 16 months. For that reason it may interest you to know how the members of the American Expeditionary Forces in France and Germany are discussing the questions that are now coming to the front. It is a serious mistake to believe that the Doughboys will favor a presidential candidate drawn from the personnel of the army. Very frankly they are weary of army life, army authority and the glamour of military pomp. They enthuse over some officers, but the objects of their sincere regard are the men who actually led them in the fighting. Some colonels, captains and lieutenants might control the ballots of their own companies or regiments but officers of higher rank would not be flattered by an accurate forecast of the votes they could command in the American army. The American soldier is, as the English say, thoroughly fed up on military control and would flinch from the thought of placing in the White House a man selected from military circles. In an overwhelming majority of cases the Doughboys' one ambition is to get out of uniform and settle down to the job of winning the battles of peace. His vote will go to the man who, in his opinion, is best suited to the task of restoring and maintaining national prosperity. As a general rule the Doughboy will come back home with some deep-rooted theories about what he considers unfair treatment. He believes that he has been charged exorbitant prices by the French. He thinks that after risking his life for his country he should have been given a chance to get back to the United States before the men in the training camps with a record of only a few months' service were released and given a first chance to find good jobs. And in regards to the prohibition amendment as a distinct violation of his rights as an American citizen. It is quite useless to argue these points with the majority of the men in northern France and Germany. They balance the present cost of commodities in France with pre-war prices in the United States and insist that profiteering is responsible for what they regard as a series of hold-ups. If on the theme of their retention on foreign duty you point out the mechanical impossibility of transporting troops from America to relieve them, they counter with the argument that the first troops sent back from France were the last troops to get here. This of course is true, but instead of being flatter by the fact that the War Department reposes more confidence in them than in the untested products of the training camps they stick to their argument that they earn the right to go home first and let the other fellow do the policing and road repairing. Every dough boy with whom I have discussed the question regardless of his personal habits is exceedingly bitter on the subject of the prohibition amendment. The American soldiers insist that politicians took advantage of their absence from home to put over the bone-dry law. The fact that the question was not put to a popular vote does not alter their convictions. They think it was a crooked deal to make a radical change in the Constitution while two million voters were fighting for that Constitution on foreign soil and unable even to voice their opinions. The men in the AEF will return with a distinct grudge against the national and state legislators who favored a change in the Constitution while the war was being fought and won. The American soldier has had no chance to talk since he was sent to France, but he will have a great deal to say when he returns. And some of the things he is waiting to say will exert a tremendous influence on the next national election. A newspaper correspondent just back from France. End of section 4. Section 5 of Essays on Prohibition. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Prohibition, Why? by Silas C. Swallow, candidate of the Prohibition Party for the Presidency of the United States. The use of alcoholic liquors for beverage purposes has never benefited one human being, either physically, intellectually, morally, or financially, in all the history of the world. But on the other hand, it has injured and even ruined millions of human beings for time and eternity. Therefore the liquor traffic, sales in which in the United States last year amounted to over one billion four hundred million dollars, has been and is a curse to the individual, to the family and especially to that defenseless portion known as women and children, to labor, which it cripples, and to the taxpayers, who must pay for the support of the poppers, the criminals, and the insane it produces. Hence it is not true that, if you let liquor alone it won't hurt you. The innocent must suffer with the guilty. The abstaining taxpayer must pay his own taxes, and in addition there too, the taxes which the drinker could have paid but for his indulgence. Traffic is such an enemy to the church and to the highest interests of the race as championed by the church that Catholicism is organizing everywhere total abstinence societies and Protestantism, through several of its denominational utterances, has said that, no political party should receive the support of Christian men so long as it fails to put itself on record in an attitude of open hostility to the liquor traffic," end quote. Both the Republican and the Democratic parties, having thus failed, men who vote for either thereby vote themselves as un-Christian, since a man who does what he knows he ought not to do is not a Christian. Many civic societies have excluded liquor sellers from eligibility to membership therein. Many liquor sellers will employ only abstainers to handle their poison. Many life insurance companies make a special premium for abstainers. Few employers will tolerate drinking habits in their employees. 800,000 of the 1.2 million employees on American railways are under orders neither to drink intoxicants nor enter the places where intoxicants are sold on penalty of dismissal from service. The Supreme Court of the United States, on December 5th, 1887, declared that, quote, it is within the discretionary police powers of a state to protect public health, safety, and morals, even by the destruction of property, and that the Kansas laws providing for the destruction of property used in connection with liquor selling do not violate the provision of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution against the destruction of property, end quote. That was equivalent to saying that the machinery and wares of the liquor seller are not property. Again, the Supreme Court said, quote, no legislature can bargain away the public health or the public morals. The people themselves cannot do it much less their servants, end quote. And yet the United States government in 1862 entered into and has ever since continued a co-partnership with the liquor traffic sharing its profits as revenue and protecting its interests since taxation always implies protection to the man and to the property taxed. The government's share of the blood money is less than two hundred millions. For every dollar of revenue it costs the government over sixteen dollars to care for the results of the business as found in asylums, almshouses, and criminal courts. The national government overrides state prohibitory laws sending its poison into prohibition states and there legalizing its sale in violation of state laws. It is estimated that three-fourths of our eighty millions of people are total abstainers. The one-fourth drink an average of seventy dollars worth of liquor annually. A family of six persons would thus consume four hundred and twenty dollars worth if all drank or enough to pay for a very comfortable home every two years. Of the twenty millions who drink one-half are practically homeless. They live principally in the slums of our cities and towns. They constitute the dangerous classes. The politicians from President Down in some instances knowingly or in willful ignorance depend largely on the buying of this slum vote to carry the elections. The party managers claim that it required over six millions of dollars to elect Mr. McKinley. Much of this money was spent in corrupting the ballot. MS. Quay, who managed the Harrison campaign, said, quote, As goes New York State, so goes the Union. As goes New York City, so goes the State. As goes One Ward, so goes the City. Hurry on your money, end quote. And the money rolled in almost as freely as water, certainly as freely as whiskey. The ward was carried, so was the City, the State, the Nation. It has come to be understood that no political party which antagonizes the rum vote can elect its candidates. The two hundred fifty thousand liquor sellers vote solidly for the man they want. They know neither morals nor politics, but only business. Each dealer is supposed to control ten votes. Thus two and a half millions of votes go with the party that is likely to do most for their business, or at least that will promise most. The church vote of five millions, on the other hand, divides on the question of the tariff, even at a time when the difference in revenue between a Republican tariff bill and one presented by the Democrats was less than fifty millions, while the direct cost for liquor that very year was twenty-five times that amount. The church vote therefore practically joins with that of the crime makers to fill jails, asylums, almshouses, and penitentiaries, and at the same time to deplete the churches. The members of the churches do so under the stress of party spirit, for the purpose of keeping in line with the strong parties, which are greatly in the majority as compared with the prohibition partisan forces, and ostensibly for saving the country just this once more from the great calamity of having the other party candidates elected. When it is said that prohibition don't prohibit, it is meant that prohibition don't annihilate. This is true of the prohibitions of arson, larceny, murder, and all the other crimes in the catalogue, and yet no one clamors for the repeal of the laws against them on the ground foresooth that prohibition don't prohibit. When we remember that the national drink bill last year was more than twice as much as the capital stock of all the national banks, that it was more than half as much as the amount of deposits in all our savings banks, that it was one third more than our entire public debt, that it was one half as much as the value of all our domestic animals, that it was more than half of the value of all our farm products, that it was little less than the capitalization of all the industrial combinations, including the much-complained of trusts as they existed in 1900, that it was a third more than our total imports of merchandise, and a twelfth more than all of our exports, and then when we remember that the people who consumed this liquid poison would have been infinitely better off if they had made a big bonfire of their money instead of purchasing with it a substance hurtful to all the interests of the individual, the family, the community, the state, and the nation, we have reason to lament our folly and wonder whether it will ever end. Just now many thousands of laborers are on strike for more remunerative wages in order that they may have the full dinner-pale promised four years ago, but which in too many instances is nearly empty because of the excessive cost of living, growing out of the cornering of the necessities of life by unscrupulous worshipers of Mammon. On the other hand many employers of labor are suspending their employees on the plea that there has been overproduction and that we must wait till the stock is reduced as the result of the buyers catching up with the producers. The real reason for this distress among workmen in the midst of plenty is not overproduction but under consumption. Instead of spending over fourteen hundred millions of dollars for liquid poison, if this enormous sum had been spent in the purchase of shoes for the millions of bare feet for hats with which to cover hither-two hatless heads for cotton and woollen goods to take the place of the rags and tatters in which the denizens of the slums are everywhere arrayed for carpets to cover the bare floors of the tenement districts for tables and chairs and stoves and bedding and food, all of which would have so greatly ministered to the physical comfort, the intellectual growth and the spiritual uplift of the submerged classes every factory would now be running on full time new factories would be in process of building, railroads would be stretching out their iron arms to communities hither-two unfamiliar with the music of the locomotives whistle, and such an era of prosperity would be donning upon this land as the world never dreamed of before. We are in the midst of a conflict as irrepressible as was that concerning slavery forty-five years ago when the Greeleys and garrisons the Garrett Smiths, the Philipses, the Sumners and the Sewards raised the battle cry that, quote, this country could not remain half free and half slave, end quote. The conviction is growing rapidly upon the American people that this country cannot long remain half drunk and half sober that the profit-sharing partnership existing between the government and the liquor business must soon be dissolved or that there will come to us as a nation such punishment in the form of national reverses as history shows us has come to all the nations who have put upon their coin in God we trust while they study to do the work of the devil. In conclusion let me say in the language of another honor enough in American citizenship to warrant the appeal now being made to it by the prohibition party the same hands that made the traffic secure through the ballot will yet by the same process rob it of its defense trembling before the thunders of a righteous wrath it will flee for shelter and there shall none be found but unmoored and unpity like a hunted beast brought to earth at last it will shrink and shrivel and die before the blasting power of an awakened national conscience Silas C. Swallow End of Section 5 Section 6 of Essays on Prohibition this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Section 6 Effect of Prohibition by Lulu Whiteman The effect of prohibition Sumptuary law enacted in government upon the political fabric of the government should claim the serious attention of American citizens particularly we can hardly recur to the consideration of this subject too often Prohibition is essentially a repressive measure and all history shows that repressive measures under ordinary conditions not only fail but worse than fail in aiming to do away with one evil prohibitionists set up a vastly greater one in our American political life the very worst political conditions may ensue prohibition laws did not actually prohibit as everyone knows but they do bring about a state that appears upon whatever scale attempted abhorrent to every right-thinking person as to some of the results Professor Hugo Munsterberg of Harvard University says judges know how rapidly the value of the oath sinks in courts where violation of the prohibition laws is a frequent charge and how habitual perjury becomes tolerated by respectable people the city politicians know still better how closely blackmail and corruption hang together in the social psychology with the enforcement of laws that strike against the belief and traditions of wider circles the public service becomes degraded the public conscience becomes dulled and can there be any doubt that disregard of laws is the most dangerous psychological factor in our present day American civilization and upon this question of the effectiveness of prohibitory legislation and the effects of such legislation on the moral life of the nation the committee of 50 on the physiological aspects of the liquor problem and its exhaustive report published in 1905 said there has been concurrent evil of prohibitory legislation the efforts to force it during 40 years have had some unlooked for effects on public respect for courts judicial proceedings oaths and laws in general and for officers of the law legislators and public servants the public has seen law defied a whole generation of habitual law breakers schooled in evasion and shamelessness courts ineffective through fluctuations of policy delays perjuries negligencies and other miscarriages of justice officers of the law double faced and mercenary legislators timid and insincere candidates for office hypocritical and trucking and office holders unfaithful to pledges and public expectation through an agitation which has always had a moral end these immoralities have been developed and made conspicuous representative claud eustone of illinois in the debating congress over the hobson resolution for national prohibition said there is statewide prohibition in main and the web kenyan law prevents the overriding of that law by other states and yet there are cities in main that have more shops per capita for the public sale of liquor than my home city which is greatest distilling city in the world in parts of main candidates for sheriff who have the enforcing of the law cannot be elected to office if they do not give a public pledge that they will violate their oath of office and will not enforce the laws the same can be said of georgia another prohibition state it is for this reason that the people should be permitted to determine by their own votes the character of restraint that should be placed upon themselves in the same debate in congress representative julius kahn of california remarked mr. speaker prohibition is not temperance temperance makes for human progress it should be invoked in regard to our food our drink our dress and even our physical exercise as many people die from overriding as die from excessive use of alcohol excessive physical exercise is frequently led to heart failure and death temperance not alone in the use of alcohol but temperance in everything that affects the human race is what should be taught in the homes and schools of this country temperance harms no one on the contrary it does good prohibition on the other hand has generally resulted in making men liars, sneaks and hypocrites if men want liquor they can invariably get it and they can get it even in prohibition states the testimony is quite overwhelming that prohibition in government corrupts courts encourages false oaths intimidates legislators causes public officials to be double faced and mercenary makes sneaks, liars and hypocrites out of men increases bribery puts the way for illegal traffic and fosters an immoral negligence of law and order and in addition to all this it lessens drunkenness not a whit but on the contrary increases in temperance making it more possible and perhaps more inviting to those unable to curb the appetite what an indictment is this of prohibition and being true it would seem these well established reliable facts concerning the results of prohibition would serve to convince the citizen who is governed by reason and sound judgment rather than by sentiment and emotion that prohibition in its practical development is a real menace to the American system of government End of Section 6 Section 7 of Essays on prohibition this is a LibriVox recording are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org The Church in Politics by Edward Allen from the book Prohibition edited by Joseph Debar this is an era of reform or rather of reforms largely of reforms that do not reform was prominent in the clamor for righteousness that is the plausible if not voracious appellation of these reformatory manifestations is the liquor question in some quarters it is labeled the temperance question among people who are disposed to be truthful it is tagged the prohibition wave does any one of these titles reveal the true character of the movement all spontaneous efforts for the betterment of sociological conditions have their origin among the people of this land usually with remarkable uniformity as to locality and creed and nationality they move on to success or failure on their merits the present prohibition wave so called is an exception to this usual rule the late free silver craze was an instance of an issue which died on its merits but the liquor question is still with us in all its virulence and is as far from settlement as it was 50 years ago the present uprising against the rum power is manifest in many quarters not however as a spontaneous movement of the people anywhere but as a convenient cloak for the ulterior purposes of a numerous religious sect which has long been fighting undercover and is now contending in the open for political control of our government state and national men who study public movements of all varieties have been puzzled for some time by the continuing vitality of the present anti-rum outbreak by the precision which its maneuvers have been directed by a hidden power the atmosphere is gradually clearing the Methodist Church has cast off its temperance domino has flung aside its mask and is conspicuously waging a war for rulership in state and national politics it has no chosen arms in this contest all weapons are fitted to its hands and all alliances are welcome the end justifies the means is apparently the watchword of the fray we read in the new Straitsville Ohio record of September 11th 1908 that in Ohio when 20 ministers recently met in church conclave they so far forgot the object of their coming together that before discussing any church questions at all they passed a resolution demanding the nomination of a certain senator who had been their servile henchman in the last general assembly in the Cincinnati inquirer of October 11th we read the following Canon's course disapproved by the Methodist Conference of Missouri Special Dispatch to the Inquirer Tarquiel, Missouri October 10th the Missouri Conference of the M.E. Church today adopted resolutions expressing disapproval of the course taken by Speaker Canon and holding up the interstate liquor shipment bill and urging all voters to support who will not vote for the reelection of Speaker Canon it is hardly possible to pick up a newspaper printed anywhere in the United States without finding some evidence of political interference in purely governmental affairs by the anointed of the Methodist fraternity acting and speaking ex-cathedra in addition to opposing the reelection of Speaker Canon they were sufficiently active to prevent the renomination of Congressman John Jenkins in northern Wisconsin for the same reason that has aroused their animosity against Speaker Canon namely official opposition to an unconstitutional interstate liquor shipment law these are minor evidences of widespread and thoroughly organized efforts of the Methodist Church to dominate and rule in state and nation Ohio is just now the storm center of the prohibition outbreak the conspiracy in Ohio for Methodist supremacy had its inception shortly before the election of Governor John M. Patterson who headed the Democratic ticket in the fall of 1906 Mr. Patterson's nomination was brought about by some strange combinations as was his election the Democratic party long in the minority in Ohio as elsewhere had been held together for years by a remarkable body of loyal and sturdy men of earnest convictions and high ideals who were Democrats from principle trailing after these were the inevitable camp followers with a sent for office as keen as their lack of principle in ideals or methods these mercenaries noting the growing trend towards reform and temperance became active in their search for a candidate who would loom in the public eye as an exponent of these tendencies no one has ever believed that the late Governor Patterson had any real ambition to be Governor of Ohio those best informed have always held the belief that he sought the office mainly for the power and opportunity would give him to be of use to the corporation of which he was president and to the promotion of which he had given this company has always been officer by Methodist and has its chief patronage among the adherence of that sect it had prospered mightily in a business exploited along church lines but at the time of Mr Patterson's candidacy it was well represented in nearly every county in Ohio the hungry healers of democracy had not overlooked this fact nor did the anti saloon league with its standard oil sinews of war and its coffers replete with the offerings of favor-seeking trusts and corporations for be it known that with the anti saloon league in control of the legislature the purse strings of the favor seekers were fairly floating in the breeze when the nominating convention met Mr Patterson was the only candidate presenting a show of organization and a compact array of delegates the agents of his insurance company in every county had hustled for the president of their company without regard to their personal political preferences in fact political preferences were of small significance in a campaign for Methodist church supremacy so what the insurance agent usually a Methodist could not accomplish in a county in the way of capturing delegates was cheerfully attended to by the local Methodist preacher with a result that when the convention met the brethren were in complete control of the situation no one had ever charged Mr Patterson with being too strongly imbued with the tenets of democracy his environments were strongly republican and his ideas and the opinion of men who knew him well all leaned in the same direction the old time incorruptibles of the democratic party viewed these tenets as a leaning toward heresy but the opportunists with their hunger for office welcomed success at any price Mr Patterson was nominated by the efforts of the Methodist brethren aided by the rank and file of the democratic party you were notoriously opposed to everything that Mr Patterson stood for but who were ready to vote anybody on the ticket who gave promise of success Mr Patterson was nominated when Election Day came the motley cohorts of Patersonian democracy marched to the polls and elected him the Methodist preacher and his psalm singers and camp meeting shouters rubbed elbows with the poll sellers, touts and gamblers and the horse racing fraternity all of whom were disgruntled at Governor Herrick for vetoing a race track poll selling bill the anti saloon league and its standard oil influence were in evidence on all hands the corporations and trusts came down handsomely at the bidding of their Methodist allies and the followers of Wesley found themselves easily in the saddle in their first openly conducted political effort for state domination the death of Governor Patterson followed later came the suits against the Union Central Life Insurance Company large amounts for unpaid taxes brought by the treasurer of Hamilton County, Ohio one of these bitterly contested legal battles has been waged to the Supreme Court of Ohio and a decision from which there can be no appeal has been rendered against the company for something like $184,000 and the company has just affected a compromise of other pending tax cases by paying $150,000 into the county treasury it was unfortunate for democracy that it should have been led by its hunger for the flesh pots of office into an alliance with any sect or creed it was still more unfortunate that the sect scrambling for power should have chosen for its standard bearer a man who in his inaugural address exhorted for civic righteousness and the enforcement of the moral law but who according to the late decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio had failed to pay to the treasurer of his home county the taxes due by the insurance company of which he was president democracy was unwise and misled in selecting such a candidate the Methodist Church and its ambition to control politics and make itself a state power in Ohio did only what might be expected of an organization of its nature when it voted unanimously on the Democratic ticket for a man who was not at heart a Democrat and when it took up for its candidate and as the exponent of its morals a man who accepted the nomination chiefly because in the opinion of those who were close to him he hoped in the event of election to be powerful enough to cover up the tax emissions of his insurance company Governor Paterson was the only Democrat on the ticket who was elected and he made public acknowledgement that he owed his election to the great Methodist Church of the state of Ohio Lieutenant Governor Andrew L. Harris was a Republican and upon his accession to the throne the Methodist contention for political power found a staunch supporter caring no more for temperance than due the promoters of the conspiracy who use prohibition as a subterfuge for their political lens Governor Harris has been the pliant and subservient tool of the three forces which conspired to carry forward the Methodist supremacy idea Governor Harris is an astute crossroads politician with the face of a fox and the instincts of a weasel he knows where the ducklings nestle and the broilers roost his cowboy methods and stagefarm or makeup are cultivated for scenic effect realizing that the crop of Methodist votes harvested by Paterson would be a convenient and useful adjunct to his granary he has used the power of his great office strictly and solely in the interests of the trust and corporations the anti-saloon league and the prohibitionist these three forces may be rightly labeled the wallet and the brains and the right hand of the Methodist church and its present contention for power the problem is an interesting one and keen interest is felt in its working out the masses of the American people nominally educated in the sense that a little school and constitutes education our sleep is yet to the portent of this church attempt to control in state and national politics when the awakening comes who can forecast the result will our people permit themselves to be bound in the chains of clerical slavery by the rack and thumb screw methods of the middle ages or will they arise in their might and run the conspirators who are working to overturn the cherished doctrine of separation of the state and church one of the boasted tenants of the creed time alone will tell but there are those who predict that when the awakening does come it will be a day of graph and quick judgment tax exempt churches will not then be used as political rostrums for the enslavement of free Americans by any creed or sect let us hope that in the reckoning justice and wisdom may prevail to the extent at least that the innocent will be 1909 and a section 7 the church in politics section 8 of essays on prohibition this is a LibriVox recording or LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org the prohibitionist from prohibition poems and other verse by Frank Earl Herrick a puritan in things of state with heart to dare and soul to wait a never flinching faith at right shall surely win piercing with his eagle eyes through the veils of compromise in the schemes of men and parties for perpetuating sin the soldier sentry on the heights as the breaking of the light blowing a clear revelry for every sleeping tent sending forth a ringing note from the silver trumpets throat like a war cry and a challenge by a fearless fulman sent undismayed by sword of feet bugle sounding a retreat truce or arm assist or parley never touched his lip but his quenchless spirit rose with the number of his foes and he clutched the sword and buckler with a stronger grip he looked on the nation's vice of selling sanction for a price to poison, stain and blast the noblest things of life and a soul burst into flame at his country's sin and shame and uncompromising fury keyed him to a fiercer strife he beheld the tragic lives of the drunkards in the guives and the shackles that were forged by free men at the poles and the men who heard the cry mournfully passed by with a haughty spirit of their little Levite souls feeling for his fellow's fate stirred him to a righteous hate filled his breast with sorrow and his eyes with tears as the master's eyes were wet when he saw from Olivet the city soon to meet his love with mockery and jeers heart of Luther strong and brave lovejoy's pity for the slave soul and sword of Cromwell fighting with his foes strength be to your shining steel fire to your flaming zeal victory to your valor and your reign of righteous blows June 12, 1914 End of Section 8 The Prohibitionist Section 9 of Essays on Prohibition This is a LibriVox recording A LibriVox recording Recordings are in the public domain For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Section 9 First half-century of Prohibition in America From Prohibition by Joseph Debar During the colonial days nearly all of the colonies from Maine to Georgia enacted at different times laws prohibiting in various ways the manufacture and sale of liquors and in some instances of tobacco also These laws were uniformly disregarded and were productive of numerous evil consequences So impossible was it to enforce them and so great were the abuses growing out of them that they rarely remained upon the statute books more than a few years Such experiments were repeated from time to time always with like results until towards the revolution when they were given up The colonial experience with prohibitory laws so impressed the people that during the first 70 years of independence little or no effort was made in the direction of prohibition Between 1850 and 1860 however there was a revival of prohibitory efforts and laws were enacted in various states forbidding the manufacture intoxicating liquors Maine adopted prohibition in 1851 and still has it on her books but it has never been enforced and in the towns and cities of that state the open saloon is as familiar and public as in any state of the union Vermont followed Maine in 1852 by the adoption of prohibitory laws and kept them continually on her statute books for half a century in the effort to enforce these laws severe and unusual punishments search without warrant and denial of trial by jury were resorted to the accused was forced to testify against himself the courts became prosecuting officers and a process of injunction was adopted ruinous to innocent parties three convictions were allowed for a single offense and informers were stimulated by fees and shares of fines and all to no purpose in temperance and contempt of law steadily increased in 1902 at the end of 50 years the report of the United States Commissioner of Internal Revenue showed that one United States license to sell liquor was issued for every 120 voters in the state in the fall of 1902 a movement was inaugurated looking to the adoption of a license system the campaign which terminated in the overthrow of prohibition was in many respects remarkable a raid on the side of license were the progressive elements of the state supported by men in all walks of life of the best thought and highest morals men profoundly impressed with the futility and bad results of the law a raid with the prohibitionists were the illicit liquor sellers who preferred the unrestricted sale under prohibition to a regulated trade under license on four separate occasions during the campaign the voters of the state showed their disapproval of prohibition in the caucuses and the legislature in the election when they voted on the question direct and finally when the towns voted on license March 3rd 1903 on the last occasion in 87 towns all in the state of any size declared for license New Hampshire adopted statutory prohibition in 1855 for 34 years every effort was made to enforce it with results so far from satisfactory and so injurious that at a popular election for the adoption of a prohibitory amendment to the state constitution held April 12th 1889 the amendment was defeated by an enormous majority two counties only in the entire state gave it majorities on March 18th 1903 the lower house of the legislature passed a license bill by a vote of 214 to 107 few days later the bill passed the senate by a vote of three to one and on March 27th received executive approval and license became the law of the state the cities of the state stood overwhelmingly for license their vote in the legislature being 121 to 8 in its favor more noteworthy is the fact that the rural members taken separately voted for license in the proportion of 97 to 76 representatives of both political parties were also in a majority in favor of license Massachusetts tried prohibition from 1855 to 1870 she found the law vain and injurious and upon the testimony of her governors and best citizens fatally hurtful to the cause of temperance after 15 years of earnest trial she also repudiated the law and when in April 1889 a strenuous effort was made to again engraft prohibition upon the constitution of the state it failed the farming population threw its weight with out of the cities against the amendment one town only in the commonwealth gave it a majority the campaign was one of exceptional interest the terms and time of the fight were dictated by the prohibitionists who were ably led and their cause was advocated by hundreds of speakers they deluged the state with literature and brought into action an army of workers remarkable for its numbers no method known to the politician was left untried in the efforts to carry prohibition as elsewhere the prohibitionist tried to make it appear that all morality was on their side all immorality opposed to them this assumption failed of its purpose the influential journals of the state almost to a unit against the amendment exposed the fallacy and threw their influence in behalf of license profiting by past experience they fought with a vigor born of conviction the religious papers joined hands with the powerful dailies making conscience of the fight the christian union the constitutionalist and the christian register hurled a thunder against the adoption of the amendment nor was the press unsupported by the church many scores of the most eminent clergymen of the commonwealth comprising the brains the dignity and the worth of the ministry of the state united in remonstrances against the adoption of prohibition among the ministers so remonstrating such men as Rev. Dr. Phillips Brooks Rev. Dr. Savage Rev. Dr. Brooks Hairford Rev. Dr. Cyrus Bartol Rev. Dr. Peabody and the Rev. Father Conaty the president of the Catholic National Total Abstinence Society of America and many others of celebrity men revered for character and purity of motive many of these great divines preached from their pulpits against the fanaticism united with them in the crusade against prohibition were five of the seven colleges of the state President Elliott of Harvard in an open letter condemned the effort to make men good by law the opposition to the amendment was nonetheless remarkable among the lawyers either in vigor or in character of those opposed a protest signed by nearly 500 of the ablest members of the bar including such names of national reputation as E.R. Hoare Ex-Governor Russell Charles Theodore Russell Ex-Governor Gardner Ex-Governor Rice Patrick Collins and others equally known was sent broadcast throughout the Commonwealth following the protest of the lawyers came one of the physicians headed by Oliver Wendell Holmes and nearly all the eminent doctors of the state the merchants and businessmen appreciating the disaster that would follow prohibition also united in a remonstrance to which were appended nearly 1000 names labor united with capital and hostility to prohibition the labor leaders declaring their belief that the adoption of the amendment would seriously affect the interests urged its defeat the remonstrances supported by the great name signed to them coincided with the experience of the people who had tried prohibition and knew by its fruits what it was statistics were not wanted to show its evil effects when it was formally the law of the state these statistics were above suspicion as they were prepared under the order of the governor and legislature by the honorable Carol D. Wright one of the most eminent and reliable statisticians of America they show the alarming extent of intemperance after prohibition and the rapid decrease of drunkenness when the prohibitory statue was replaced by a license law the tax question cut a considerable figure in the campaign the enormous loss of revenue from licenses and the consequent heavy taxes were so obvious that the prohibitionist did not attempt to argue on this question united with the prohibitionist were the low saloon and dive keepers of the state and these strove for prohibition with a zeal worthy of a higher motive and a better cause they worked for prohibition in order that there might be no license and that under prohibition they might have an opportunity of conducting an illegal business while other men held licenses because no man would sneak through alleys and barways to patronize them this fact convinced earnest and conservative people that prohibition meant unrestricted traffic and the amendment was defeated by 44,552 majority in 1853 Rhode Island adopted prohibition and for 10 years gave it as far as possible in 1863 the results had been so injurious that the law was repealed not satisfied with the first experience she again adopted prohibition in 1886 the second experiment proved far more disastrous than the first and in June 1889 the people of that state repudiated prohibition at the polls by the enormous majority of 18,597 out of a total vote of less than 38,000 the vote cast against prohibition being nearly three to everyone in its favor when the law was adopted in 1886 it had a majority of 5,883 three years of experience had therefore changed the views of more than four fits of the voters of the state on this subject history does not present any more striking change of public opinion upon any subject as early as 1854 Connecticut placed prohibition in the organic law of the state and for 18 years used the utmost power of the Commonwealth for its enforcement and finally gave up the experiment in 1872 in October 1889 an effort was made to again engraft prohibition upon the state constitution and resulted in an glorious failure nearly three votes to one being cast against the measure New York passed prohibitory laws in 1854 tried them for two years and gave up the experiment as hopeless the first attempt at prohibition in Pennsylvania was made in June 1889 the question was thoroughly discussed throughout the state and after thorough enlightenment the Keystone state declared by a majority of 194,556 the greatest ever cast by any state on any subject since the foundation of the union that the law was not suited to it or helpful to the cause of temperance in 1855 Maryland adopted prohibition in no state was the result no disastrous and so freighted with evils bad results followed the law so rapidly that after a few months trial it was repealed and there has been no disposition on the part of that state to repeat the severe lesson it then received in the same year Delaware adopted prohibition and tried for two years to enforce it but in 1857 gave up the effort and has since shown no inclination to again try the experiment Ohio also repeated the bitter experience the law in that state which was adopted in 1855 was short-lived and was wiped from the statute books during the same year among the states which persisted in the experiment of prohibition Michigan may be enumerated this state adopted the law in 1853 and for 22 years endeavored by the whole power of the state and by extraordinary police laws and regulations to enforce it only to find the effort futile she abandoned the policy in 1875 and when a faction endeavored to again saddle it upon the state in 1887 the people overwhelmed it at the polls in the words of general R. A. Alger you cannot talk prohibition to the people of Michigan they have tried it and know what a dire failure it is Indiana passed prohibitory measures in 1855 they were never enforced and were soon abandoned in 1882 a second effort was made to impose prohibition on the state but was defeated by the biggest majority cast in that state on any question for nearly 20 years Nebraska in the same year adopted prohibition but its enforcement was found impossible and it was soon repealed a second effort was made in 1880 and was defeated by a decisive majority of 45,000 the legislature of Illinois enacted a prohibitory law in 1855 but it was so unpopular with the people of the state that in the election in the fall of the same year both the law and its champions were buried twice the effort was made to fasten prohibition on Wisconsin and twice the governor proposed his veto with the hearty concurrence of the people this was in 1855 since that time a more liberal spirit has guided the state under prohibition Iowa witnessed an exodus of her population a depression in her commercial interests accompanied by great moral retrogression and a complete revolution in her political status the law was enacted in 1884 so calamitous were the results that in obedience to overwhelming popular demand it was modified and practically abandoned a few years ago Kansas has been under prohibitory laws for the past 22 years having adopted them in 1882 that they are ineffective is demonstrated by the open saloons and secret joints in all the towns and cities of the state that they are detrimental to the welfare of the state is proved by the depression in her commercial manufacturing and industrial enterprises and by the enormous tax rates prevalent ranging from 4 to 8 percent that they have not been beneficial to the moral tone of the state is evidenced by the fact that thousands of the best men of the state earnestly advocate the overthrow of the law an effort was made in 1887 to put prohibition into the Constitution of Texas and failed by a majority of 92,661 a few months later a similar effort was made in Tennessee and was likewise overwhelmed by a majority of 2,693 in the fall of the same year Oregon submitted a prohibitory amendment which shared a similar fare fully two-thirds of the voters of the state casting their ballots against it in November 1888 West Virginia voted on the question the subject was thoroughly discussed investigations into the workings of the law and other states were carefully made and a full vote was pulled resulting in the defeat of the amendment by a majority of 35,574 only two counties in the state gave prohibition majorities North Carolina adopted prohibition in 1889 by a scant majority of 1,159 the experience of the state has been the usual one the law has not been enforced the sale of liquors has in no way diminished and the only effect has been the substitution of the unlicensed irresponsible secret joint for the open regulated saloon South Dakota adopted prohibition in 1889 every possible means was exhausted in an unfailing effort to enforce it without decreasing the sale of liquors serious evils spring up as an outgrowth of the law the development of the state which had been phenomenal during the ten years prior to the adoption of the measure was brought to a standstill in 1896 prohibition was overwhelmingly rejected and the state returned to a license the experience of communities which have tried local prohibition or local option offers in no way from that of the states which have tried prohibitions it has uniformly failed to prohibit and brought in its wake a long train of attendant evils and disaster from 1890 to 1903 1,853 communities have voted on the subject of local option in 510 of these communities local option was defeated in the remaining 1,343 communities local option carried in a few of these communities elections have been held frequently with results alternating between license and prohibition in 592 communities local option is nominally enforced but in a few if any is there any real enforcement while the towns have suffered severely in 751 communities in which at the first election local option carried it has since been defeated the communities being satisfied by experience that there was a failure the aggregate majorities in favor of local option and all such communities at the first election on the subject was 108,942 the aggregate majorities for license in the same communities when local option was repudiated was 159,611 notable among the communities adopting local option was the city of Atlanta in less than two years the city saw 1,100 of its houses vacant its debt enlarged its taxes increased and drunkenness more riotous than had ever before been known with the promptness that the case demanded the city repudiated the law in November 1887 by a majority which left little hope of ever again imposing it upon her people prohibition has been no more successful in Canada than in the United States a few years ago a law was passed similar to those enforced in the states of the union given a sincere and earnest trial in April 1889 it was repealed every town and city in Canada which voted on that day rejected prohibition Thomas Jefferson knew human nature when he said tell any man he shall not do a thing or have a thing and that thing becomes the very one which he wishes to do or have the fruit of only one tree in the garden of Eden was forbidden yet Adam and Eve ate of that tree the Roman Empire tried to destroy wine culture in Gaul and ignominiously failed in the early days of Rome women were forbidden to drink wine and Seneca bitterly laments the violation of the law in the 11th century it was declared a capital offense to sell drink in Scotland the houses of the liquor dealers and they themselves banished in less than a generation under the effect of this law drunkenness became more general and common in Scotland than it has ever been in any country in the world in England by Act 9 George II chapter 23 a law prohibitive in effect was enacted of the effect of this law Smollett says the populace soon broke through all restraint though no license was obtained and no duty paid liquor continued to be sold in all corners of the streets and the consumption considerably increased every year when in 1743 this act was repealed it was shown that the consumption of spirits had increased during the life of the act from 527 gallons in 1864 sick to 7,160,000 gallons in 1742 Herbert Spencer commenting on the effect of the act says beyond the encouragement of fraud, lying, malice cruelty, murder contempt of law and conspicuous crookedness multitudinous other evils were caused or augmented and indirect demoralization was added to a direct increase of the vice aimed at end of first half century of prohibition in America end of section 9 section 10 of essays on prohibition this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org prohibition by James Logan Mosby from Oklahoma City sir it is a source of amazement to me that the big magazines of America like the North American Review are ignoring almost the greatest economic most vital question that society has ever had to deal with for there are few indeed that ever even touch upon the subject of alcoholism except in a purely scientific way which arouses no general interest in the questions involved in its use possibly many of them fear resentment from the liquor interest but I feel pretty sure that cannot be implied of the North American review but again cannot the editors of the review see that prohibition is a live issue cannot they see that it is sweeping the country is even now a national issue and do they not realize that prohibition will be nationwide within the next decade I'm not a religious fanatic nor even a prohibition crank I merely see the situation with unprejudiced eyes from a businessman standpoint and I see America prohibition in the very near future end of section 10 end of essays on prohibition by various authors