State Prohibition Convention.
By Editor
THE Prohibitionists met in Convention in San Francisco, Sept. 28. One of the earliest movements was that of a Methodist minister, who commenced making a speech in favor of the Republican party. He was ruled out of order. From this time on, during the whole day, the hall was a scene of wild confusion. Resolutions, amendments, substitutes, motions, counter-motions, with et ceteras to any extent, were poured in so fast that the chairman seemed to lose all power to control the discordant elements. Some were obstinately persistent in constantly presenting motions, and continuously talking about them and about everything else. It was claimed that enemies of the cause had come in to run the Convention in the interests of the political parties, or to break it up. This seemed to offer the most reasonable solution to the tumultuous scene.451In the evening, a better state of things prevailed. A discussion was raised on the question of the advisability of putting a separate ticket in the field. This brought out some excellent speeches, and it was soon apparent that the strength of the Convention was on the side of a nomination. As this became a settled fact, the party obstructionists changed their tactics, and began to threaten to withdraw from the Convention if a ticket were nominated. About 10 P. M., it was voted to put up a ticket. Next morning, a Mr. Nelson, a preacher, read a protest against the action of the Convention, and withdrew. He spoke for himself and a number of others. Judge Thompson charged him, in emphatic terms and manner, of stating that which was not true. The platform committee then reported. The platform was numbered to eleven points, really embracing nine subjects. And this was enough to insure more division. Prohibition will best be accomplished by making it the specialty of a prohibition party. Whenever that party develops strength enough to make it an object for one of the great political parties to adopt it, then the success of prohibition is assured. And a party will adopt it just as soon as it is shown to be necessary to success. But cumbered with too many side issues, it will not receive the same favor. The woman’s suffrage plank was received with full as much enthusiasm as any other. The following brief resolution is one of the best in the list:— "6th. We emphatically protest against all State subsidies, or other countenances to encourage the business of making intoxicating drinks from grapes, and against appropriating public funds for horse-racing at our State and District fairs." The "Railroad Plank," as in the Republican Convention, raised the warmest controversy. The Sunday resolution was, of course, favorably received. Mr. Boren, of whom we wish to learn more, moved an amendment in favor of those who conscientiously keep the seventh day. He enforced it with a brief but very candid statement of their rights, and of the wrong of trying to bind their consciences and to restrain their religious convictions. His words evidently made considerable impression, and for a short time we thought it possible that the Convention would bring us in to work with the Prohibitionists of this State. But he was followed by a Mr. Swan, who made one of the most remarkable little speeches we ever heard. It consisted of three points, the first two of which were simple declarations, the third he argued somewhat. The points of his speech are as follows:— - He did not believe that Sunday is a divine day.
- He would not permit any man or any Convention to bind his conscience.
- That everybody ought to be compelled to keep Sunday!
For force of logical consecution, for high regard for religious principles and the rights of conscience, we think this speech stands unequaled! When the vote was taken on Mr. Boren’s amendment, it received one lonesome Aye, with a very emphatic No. Dr. R. H. McDonald was nominated for Governor. We see it stated in an Oakland paper that he has always been a rabid Democrat. But this is a mistake. He has been a Republican only. A full ticket was nominated. We are not strong in faith that the ticket will receive a large vote.