its unrestricted manufacture and sale is in direct violation of that general principle of law which underlies the organic structure of all government, the general welfare of the people, "the supreme law of the land." I close this chapter by a recurrence to the motto I have adopted expressive of the leading principles contended for throughout the preceding pages of this work: "Salus populi suprema lex," the welfare of the people is the highest law. The next and last chapter will be devoted to the press, whose power and influence can not be overlooked in the discussion of so great a question as the one I have been considering.

CHAPTER XIV.

PROHIBITION AND THE PRESS.

THE DAILY AND WEEKLY PAPERS-ANTI-PROHIBITION SPEAKERS AND LEADERS-CHEERING WORDS TO THE TEMPERANCE WORKERS, ETC.

I can not conclude this work without some reference to the power of the press, the general tone of which must necessarily exert a large and far-reaching influence not only upon the results of the canvass which is now agitating the minds of our people, but upon the great revolution which is rolling on towards the ultimate destruction of the liquor traffic in the land. The influence of the press, for good or for evil, is entirely beyond estimate; beyond the capacity of the human mind to conceive. I am not vain enough to attempt even a feeble portrayal of the majesty of its power in leading and directing the minds and the hearts of the people. Those who do not read the papers, are led by those who do read them, and they in turn are to a great extent influenced in their opinions by what they gather from their readers. This is indeed an age of newspapers. Time with a large class of our intelligent reading people is too precious to devote to the perusal of books. They read the daily and weekly papers and from them gather almost exclusively their practical ideas of life and its current affairs. The fewest number have time to study the classics or to pour over the old musty volumes of scientific lore or political economy. They read as they run, and run as they read, often without much thought as to

the character of their reading. Many there are who take every thing they see in print for the truth. They accept as the best article of logic the very flimsiest specimens of moral, social, and political sophistry.

They do not take time to hunt down the fallacy even though it should establish a proposition in direct conflict with their own individual experience and observation. Indeed, they swallow it all, good, bad, or indifferent. It is this tendency of the present fast age to accept as the truth every assumption indulged in by the biased mind of the newspaper editor or writer, that gives to the press the great power it is known to possess. The grandest truths ever spoken, if conveyed only through the medium of unwritten language can exert but a limited influence as it reaches the understandings of but few. The most palpable falsehood when scattered abroad through the columns of the press may influence thousands to their detriment, possibly leading to their ultimate ruin. This is why the sayings of an editor however insignificant and unreliable he may be in his general character, are of more importance in the estimation of the public than those of any other, though he be as wise as was Solon or Solomon. What a man says "with his mouth" soon perishes; what he says with his paper is treasured up and may live for ages whether it be a truth or a falsehood. What a man says expends itself upon his immediate hearers; what he writes for the press may echo and re-echo throughout all the intellectual universe, and through all time, and its influence for good or for bad may reach into eternity. I speak of this to show why it is that these newspaper men have so much power and influence in moulding public sentiment. Indeed, no great principle can be promulgated among the people without the aid of the press.

We cannot now understand how many kind ever made any perceptible advancement in civilization before the art of

printing was invented. The progress of the arts and sciences and the knowledge of the principles of human government must have been slow. We may wonder how there could have been any progress at all. But be that as it may, we now realize that the art of printing has not only been invented, but that it has become a mighty engine of power. It is an instrumentality that ought to be used in the service of every righteous cause, in the establishment of every correct principle of government and of every popular movement having in view the promotion of the public good. It is a power that the prohibitionists of Texas ought not to ignore. Every legitimate effort ought to be made, every instrumentality not in conflict with right, ought to be brought to bear to secure the co-operation of the press in the accomplishment of the purposes and the objects in view. It is folly to denounce the country press as venal and corrupt.

It does no good whatever; besides, it does harm; it makes matters worse; it does not in the least keep people from reading the editorial columns of their local papers and believing every word they may say, however absurd it may be when logically dissected. Every bad word that you may say against a newspaper or its editor, however infamous he may be, only brings him into notice, advertises his paper, and increases its circulation. Hence, it adds proportionally to its influence on the opposite side. I do not mean by this however that we must not repudiate their absurdities, but that in our treatment of the fallacies contained in their arguments we ought to be temperate; we ought not to deal in meaningless personalities.

We ought to address what we have to say to the proposition falsely assumed, and not to the man or to the instrumentality through which he expressses himself. If the devil should speak the truth, we ought not to reject it. If our best friend on earth should give expression to a falsehood, either intentionally or ignorantly, we ought not to accept it because of

our respect and good feeling for the one who originates or propagates the false statement.

Having said this much, I shall proceed more directly to the discussion of the true relation of the press to the people. A failure to understand this relationship and to appreciate the great difficulties encountered by the country press in dealing with great, or even unimportant issues which come up for attention, causes almost, if not all, of the dissatisfaction that is so often and generally expressed by the people at the failure of the newspapers to speak out boldly and unreservedly upon all of such questions, and always to be found on the right side of the controversy. In the very nature of things, a newspaper can not be on both sides of a question at the same time without assuming a very awkward and unsatisfactury attitude in the eyes of the public. One side may be right, both can not be, while it is quite possible for both to be wrong. While every public journal, as well as every private citizen, ought to speak out boldly or fearlessly when public duty or obligation demands such expression, both ought to remain silent under all other circumstances. No one ought to shrink from the discharge of a duty when it is recognized to be such. The decision which he must make for himself of the question whether there is any such duty or obligation to the public as requires a public expression must necessarily depend upon ctrcumstances. While at one time, and under certain circumstances, a man would decide in the affirmative, there may be other times and other circumstances surrounding the case which would require a different decision.

The good book tells us that "He who provideth not for his own household has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel." This may seem to some strange doctrine, yet we can not reject it without irreverance for the teachings of that holy book. If it mean anything, it means that no man is justified in neglecting the imperative wants and necessities of his fam