The Failure of Prohibition Politics
It is evident that the Prohibition party, like the W. C. T. U., has too many irons in the fire for effectual temperance work. As a political party the Prohibition political machine must needs espouse other issues foreign to temperance reform, which of necessity alienate many temperance men who are opposed to the side issues held up for indorsement by the party organization. A writer in the Occident, seeing the remoteness of victory through a political party, draws this conclusion:— "We now see that temperance men can unite extensively and efficiently by non-partisan methods. The liquor dealers have long been using such methods to protect their own interests. The National Protective Associations and the United States Brewers' Association, which were organized in 1886 to check the spread of laws prohibitory of the liquor traffic, have prevented the enactment of any such laws since they were organized, and also have accomplished much in preventing the execution of the prohibitory laws that have been previously enacted." The failure of the Prohibition political party as a means of securing prohibition has been pretty well demonstrated in the United States. The Prohibitionist, organ of that party in California, not long ago made the statement that twenty-six per cent. of the territory of the country is now under prohibitory law. Admitting the statement to be correct, it is a notable fact that no part of this result has been achieved by the election of Prohibition party nominees to office. While little or nothing is expected of the old popular parties in the way of prohibition, it is nevertheless true that the measure of prohibition so far gained has been in the main secured when one or the other of them was in power. The exceptions have been in merely local instances, where non-partisan candidates have been placed in office. Prohibition can only win as a principle, not as a political party expedient for political power.