Addresses: by John A. Martin. Delivered in Kansas.

by John Alexander Martin

Fourth, I affirm that, as a rule, arrests of those who violate our temperance laws are as swift and certain, and their punishment, when arrested, as sure and full, as are arrests and punishments of any other class of law-breakers or criminals.

Fifth, I believe and declare that, as a result of the enforcement of our prohibitory laws, and the banishment of the open saloon, fully nine-tenths of the drinking and drunkenness prevalent in Kansas eight years ago, has been abolished; that thousands of men who were then almost constantly under the influence, more or less, of intoxicants, are now temperate and sober; and that, in thousands of homes all over this State where want, wretchedness and woe were then the invited guests of drunken husbands and fathers, plenty, peace and contentment now abide.

Sixth, I assert that, in every town and city throughout the State, arrests for drunkenness are annually decreasing, notwithstanding the fact that their populations are steadily increasing.

Seventh, I affirm that public sentiment in nearly every section of Kansas has been steadily strengthening in favor of rigid temperance laws and their rigid enforcement, and that this growing sentiment is due to the plainly-apparent and now generally-conceded fact that our temperance laws have largely abolished drinking and drunkenness, and the poverty, wretchedness and crime of which the open saloon is the fruitful and certain cause.

Eighth, I assert that this development of public sentiment has made drinking unfashionable. The abolition of the saloon has practically abolished the American habit of treating. Young men in Kansas no longer regard drinking as an assertion of manhood. They know that the use of intoxicating liquors is more or less a bar to confidence, employment or preferment, and especially to political preferment. The way to office does not lead, as it did eight or ten years ago, through the open saloon. The saloon as a potential factor has been eliminated from our political system. Society does not make excuses for nor coddle the man whose breath smells like a distillery. Men of confirmed drinking habits are, as a rule, ashamed to be seen drinking, and the bad example of their habits is thus not flaunted before the public eye, to seduce and debauch young boys and callow youth. All these things have had their influence, and have wrought the happiest results in making drinking not only unfashionable, but, in large measure, unpopular and discreditable. And the effects are plainly seen in the marked sobriety of a Kansas assemblage of any character, civil, military, or political. Public sentiment is often more powerful than statutes, and in Kansas, law and public opinion unite in regarding sobriety as the highest virtue of manhood.

The enemies of all temperance laws are constantly asserting that prohibition is a failure; that more liquor is used in Kansas than was used when the saloons were open; and that drinking and drunkenness have not been reduced. And it is a mournful and shameful fact that such statements are often reiterated, indorsed or applauded by a class of so-called prohibitionists who seem to be determined that prohibition must be a failure if they are not the direct agents employed to make it a success. So far as the speech and actions of this class of persons indicate their views and purposes, they would prefer to see a saloon on every hill-top and in every valley, rather than see the Republican party continued in power. During the civil war, the Copperheads of the North, professing to be better-Union-men-than-you-are, kept up a fire in the rear that was as discouraging to the men at the front, and often as dangerous, as was the fire of the armed Confederates. The prototypes of these Northern peace-sneaks, the Copperheads of the war for the suppression of the liquor traffic, are those prohibitionists who work, or talk, or vote in such a way as to encourage or elevate to power the party that is, here and everywhere and always, the opponent and enemy of any and all laws intended to either regulate, restrict or abolish the liquor traffic. A third-party vote is half a vote for free whisky, whether it is cast in Kansas or any other State of this Union, and the man who does not know this fact is either stupidly or maliciously blind.

I avail myself of this occasion, also, to make some suggestions which, it seems to me, are worthy of consideration by your organization, and by all sincere friends of temperance in Kansas.

Whenever or wherever the laws are not honestly enforced, the local judicial officers—that is, the county attorneys and sheriffs—are the responsible parties. It is practically impossible for any one to sell intoxicating liquors as a beverage, in any town or city in Kansas, if the county attorney and sheriff of the county do their duty. These officers, coöperating together, can make the illegal sale of liquor impossible. A sheriff who is indifferent or hostile to the laws, can largely nullify any efforts of a county attorney to enforce them, and vice versa. These are the two officers who, above all others, have the absolute power, if they have also the will, to abolish liquor-selling. Both should be in harmony with the spirit of our laws, and resolved to see that they are obeyed, or liquor-selling cannot be wholly prevented. Of course the police force of any city can do a great deal to suppress the liquor traffic, but even a police force earnestly endeavoring to accomplish this result, can be thwarted in its endeavors by a county attorney and sheriff who will wink at or encourage violations of the law.

In nearly every county of Kansas, I am glad to say, the local judicial officers are in sympathy with the spirit of our laws, and prosecute, with vigor and sincerity, all who violate them. In only a few counties are the sheriffs or county attorneys opposed to the prohibition law, and do little or nothing to enforce its provisions.

What is needed in Kansas is not more laws on this subject, nor more rigorous laws, but simply a sincere and vigorous enforcement of the laws we have. It is a mistake to change or modify laws at every session of the Legislature, and the friends of temperance should not make such a mistake.