disorder and depravity, then I will concede that the amendment ought not to be adopted. The saloons a source of revenue! What a glaring absurdity! It is in deed and in fact the very canker-worm of the public revenue, which eats into and destroys the germs of material prosperity, the only true and living source of public revenue. That congressmen and reputed statesmen should attempt to palm off such an absurdity upon an intelligent people is truly surprising.

9. The zealous advocates of the prohibition idea have already established and organized a third political party, and have waged relentless warfare upon the principles and organization of other established parties. Instigated by foreign emissaries, they have by agitation for years secured from the Legislature of our State the concession of this proposition to change our organic law, and by studied purpose and concerted movement, they now seek to stiffle political expression from our people, until their own political designs are fully accomplished. We warn our people of this threatened danger and call upon them to rebuke at the polls this sinister conspiracy against their political organization and fundamental principles of American liberty.

What are you anti-prohibitionists doing in the way of organizing third parties? The Democratic party of Texas in convention assembled no longer ago than last August, decided that a man's views upon the subject now being considered should not interfere with his good-standing in the party. While there were a few overzealous prohibitionists, who were dissatisfied because the convention did not think best to go further at that time, split off from the party and undertook to revolutionize the politics of the State in a few days. The great mass of the prohibitionists of Texas adhered to the old party and carried the State by an overwhelming majority. Had it been announced in the platform of the Galveston convention that the prohibition democrats would have to surrender their views upon that subject or abandon the Demo

cratic party, the new party would have been much stronger than it was. However that may be, it was certainly established in the convention that a man may be a Simon-pure Democrat and a good prohibitionist. Acting upon that view, the prohibitionists have done nothing more than assert their right and intention to vote and work for the adoption of the amendment. They have not questioned the wisdom and patriotism of the recognized exponents of the Democratic party in the last State convention in the course they pursued in dealing with this important question of State policy. They have not so far as I have been able to learn, attempted to override the action of the convention by alligning the party organization on their side of the question. They have not attempted or threatened to read any one out of the ranks of the party, because he opposes the amendment. While they have invited everybody regardless of party affilia tions to join in the effort to "squelsh" the liquor traffic, they have not assumed to be the only "true blue" Jeffersonian Democrats in the State. Nor have they as the Simon-pure Democrats invited and received into the fold of the party of constitutional liberty a motley host of recruits who never voted a Democratic ticket in their lives, and who never felt a Democratic impulse since they were ushered into existence. It is truly humiliating to a true disciple of Jefferson to behold these pot-gutted, hypocritical, pretended apostates of Republicanism going about with "true blue" Democratic (?) badges pinned to the lapels of their coats hurraing for Jefferson and Roger Q. Mills. "O tempora, o mores!" If the immortal Jefferson could rise from the dead and behold these "True Blue" disciples who are casting out prohibition devils in his name, he would not only say, "Depart, ye cursed, etc., I never knew you," but, like the author of those memorable words to the money-changers in the temple, he would walk in and say, 66 My house shall be a house of

prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves," (politically speaking, of course.)*

The word, thieves, is used because the quotation puts it that way, and I can not substitute another, and not because all of the "True Blues" are really and in fact thieves, although a large per cent of them are life-long Republicans.

*Since the above was written, Gov. Ross has published an open letter, in which he makes known his intention to vote against the amendment. The first reason he gives is, that our fathers in establishing our present system of government were infallible, and, as they did not see proper in that day to provide against the liquor traffic, it must be wrong in principle. The argument of his Excellency would lead us to question the wisdom of every constitutional amendment or statutory enactment which has been engrafted upon our jurisprudence since the adoption of the first Constitution in 1845. He speaks of the vast improvements that have taken place, with the unprecedented increase of population (the 20,000 then and the 3,000,000 now): of the schools, colleges and churches, which have sprung up all over the country with their civilizing, refining, and christianizing influences. The inference to be drawn is, that the people at large have nothing whatever to complain of and to make them unhappy. In other words, that the social condition of the State is perfect and, therefore, could not be improved by the prohibition of the liquor traffic and the suppression of saloons. He speaks of the "abuses" of the traffic, which of course presupposes that it is a good thing in its place. He compares our condition with that of Maine, and assumes, without giving statistics, among other things, that we have fewer criminals in proportion to population than that State where prohibition has been the policy for nearly forty years. The Governor finds nothing in the Bible discouraging drunkenness, but intimates that that infallible book rather endorses the views entertained by its Antiprohibition expounders. His Excellency, I fear, has not been a regular attendant of the Sunday Schools nor a very close and critical reader of his Bible; otherwise he must have long since arrived at a different conclusion as to its teachings. (See chapter XII).

CHAPTER X.

NATIONAL PROHIBITION.

GENERAL DISCUSSION-U. S. SENATOR BLAIR'S SPEECH.

This effort would not be complete without a chapter devoted to the subject of National Prohibition, although it has not yet assumed an attitude which addresses itself to the practical consideration of the people for whose benefit the measure is intended. There has for some time been pending before Congress the following resolution, proposing an amendment to the Federal Constitution similar in its objects and effect to the measure now being submitted to the people of Texas, except that it is designed to be general in its operation, taking in all of the states and territories of the United States:

"Resolved by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of each house concurring therein), That the following Amendment to the Constitution be, and hereby is, proposed to the states to become valid when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states, as provided in the Constitution:

ARTICLE.

"SECTION I. From and after the year of our Lord 1900 the manufacture and sale of distilled alcoholic intoxicating liquors, or alcoholic liquors any part of which is obtained by distillation or process equivalent thereto, or any intoxicating liquors mixed or adulteratey with ardent spirits, or with any

poison whatever, except for medicinal, mechanical, chemical and scientific purposes, and for use in the arts, anywhere within the United States and the territories thereof, shall cease; and the importation of such liquors from foreign states and countries to the United States and territories, and the exportation of such liquors from and the transportation thereof within and through any part of this country, except for the use and purposes aforesaid, shall be, and hereby is, forever hereafter prohibited.

"SECTION II. Nothing in this article shall be construed to waive or abridge any existing power of Congress, nor the right, which is hereby recognized, of the people of any state or territory to enact laws to prevent the increase and for the suppression or regulation of the manufacture, sale, and use of liquors, and the ingredients thereof, any part of which is alcoholic, intoxicating. or poisonous, within its own limits, and for the exclusion of such liquors and ingredients therefrom at any time, as well before as after the close of the year of our Lord 1900; but until then, and until ten years after the ratification thereof, as provided in the next section, no state or territory shall interfere with the transportation of said liquors or ingredients, in packages safely secured, over the usual lines of traffic to other states and territories, wherein the manufacture, sale, and use thereof for other purposes and use than those excepted in the first section shall be lawful: provided, That the true destination of such packages be truly marked thereon.

"SECTION III. Should this article not be ratified by threefourths of the states on or before the last day of December, 1890, then the first section thereof shall take effect and be in force at the expiration of ten years from such ratification; and the assent of any state to this article shall not be rescinded nor reversed.

"SECTION IV. Congress shall enforce this article by all needful legislation.

It may be expected that all who may favor State prohibition upon principle or expediency or both would, in order to be a consistent "dyed in the wool" prohibitionist, certainly favor the proposed amendment of the Federal Constitution on the ground that if it is good for the people of each State