p. 349 | The W. C. T. U. and Politics

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Nov 27, 1889

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 4, No. 44.

The W. C. T. U. and Politics.

REGARDING the recent convention of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union at Chicago, the following is from the press dispatches:—

The event of the session was the report of the Committee on Resolutions touching the non-partisan question. The majority report says:—

“We believe it is vital to temperance reform that the principle of prohibition be made the dominant issue in American politics. We therefore give our approval to that party only which declares in its platform for prohibition in the State and nation, and stands in action for its application to law.”

The minority report was brought in by Mrs. Mattie M. Bailey, of the Iowa delegation, and read as follows:—

“That the recent amendment contests demonstrate the need of more persistent and persuasive educational temperance work among all classes of people; the results of these several contests have given us practical proof that the success in the effort for the overthrow of the legalized liquor traffic can only be assured where the intelligent convictions of the people are in favor of prohibition, and that defeat is certain where such convictions are lacking; therefore, resolved, further, that as forty odd departments of the W. C. T. U. work are for no party, but are for the education of the people in the truths of total abstinence and prohibition, and as we have in our membership women whose differing political preferences lead them to sympathize with and support different political parties, therefore it is unjust and unwise for this organization to pledge its influence, support, or allegiance to any political party.

“Unjust because if this organization is non-partisan, as our president has lately declared, such a pledge of influence, support, or allegiance, representatively given, interferes with the individual freedom of any and every member to prefer and work for the political party of her choice. Unwise because in the practical carrying out of that pledge our religious and educational work is thereby subjected to party limitations and antagonized by disastrous partisan opposition,”

Mrs. Foster and Mrs. Bailey spoke in favor of the adoption of the minority report. Mrs. Clara Hoffman spoke against its adoption. The majority report was adopted. The Iowa delegates alone voted in favor of the minority report.

At this point Mrs. J. Ellen Foster arose and read a long protest on behalf of the Iowa delegation, setting forth that they had met with rebuffs and insults until forbearance had ceased to be a virtue. At the conclusion of the reading the entire Iowa delegation left the hall.